Like Vic, I don't need to waste too much time on points of Mudcat principle, but this stuff is really pathetic.

"Amazing that not only Jim Carroll reckons anyone choosing, as Mudcat allows, to remain anonymous says the same as the next anonymous person, but Vic Smith exhibits the same illogical conclusion."

Nothing amazing about it. If you don't want to be mistaken for the next anonymous person, do something to distinguish yourself. There are plenty on here using a regular pseudonym.

"I feel I cannot carry any debate with the irrational diatribe coming from Jim Carroll. To defend him may seem a kind notion but makes you look a fool."

Jim Carroll is well able to defend himself, but I will say that - although I don't agree with him on everything by any means - he is far better-informed and articulate than most of his detractors on here. He has brought his knowledge to bear directly on the present discussion in a way that puts to shame 'because-I-say-so' statements like: "I repeat. A pop song can become traditional. That is my view and that is what we have seen in many instances."

"All the terms are subjective anyway so standing at the shoreline commanding the tide to go away looks as silly now as it did 1200 years ago"

'Traditional' has a specific meaning in the context of folk song. And if you can be 200 years out on the reign of Cnut, how seriously are we supposed to take the rest of your ideas?