To state the obvious, if you are lucky to live near to a thriving folk club then your perspective will be very different to someone who doesn't. Living in the Manchester area which had an amazing folk scene in the 70's, I tend to think I'm now in the latter category. There are a number of folk clubs I have visited recently and they all seem to operate on the regular Singers' Night with occasional (perhaps monthly guests).
Though the guests tend to be well-known names I am very surprised with the low attendances (perhaps 30) for these events. What's more, many of the regulars at the Singers' Nights don't turn up for the guests!
On the other hand there is a monthly club nearby which doesn't use the word 'folk' in its name - though it quite clearly is a folk club - and which regularly fills the room with 'locals' who know they will get quality entertainment.
Perhaps it was the quality of floors singers which heralded the death knell of the folk club? One of the reasons I stopped going to folk clubs many years ago was the self-indulgent poor quality floor singer that you had to put up with in order to hear the guest you had paid good money to see.

After these ramblings, perhaps what I am trying to say is maybe that there ought to be a clearer distinction between singarounds/singers nights or whatever and folk nights which feature a paid guest. These are different types of event which will attract different audiences - there must surely be a large body of people who just want to listen to quality music. And if there are to be floor singers, or whatever they are called these days, to support a paid guest then someone needs to exert some quality control.

I submit this knowing that many mudcatters are high quality musicians who would not be subject to the criticism above, while I certainly would be.