I do not think anyone is making any sort of attempt to jettison traditional folk. That is an artificial construct in your own mind, Jim.
The dispute is that the 54 defintion is too narrow and you have said folk is dead because it is no longer being created. Your only supporter seems to be sycophant shaw. Or are you going to contradict yourself yet again? You are the only one to describe the Walters of this world as boring old farts. - no one else. Sadly the likes of him are from a milieu that no longer exists. That is why folk from that origin is no longer created. From this it follows that if folk as a genre is still surviving and expanding then the definition needs to change. One door has shut (ever since travellers started watching TV according to you) but most of us here argue that another one has opened. Unless I am missing something the 54 definition puts so many qualifiers in place that the modern world cannot possibly allow for the creation of folk music. I will say this very clearly: I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS VIEW - folk music is still being created.
What is it about this simple concept that generates so much argument?