"but it is far from being the only one so please allow other people's view of the definition to stand"
What definition - the peopl;e in general don't give a toss and those who don't accept the established one can't agree on what they mean by folk
The only other alternative is to just do away with the word altogether - you are making it meaningless
Nobodyy is talking about a "precise" definition of folk - just one that encapsulateds the standard one enough to allow us to turn up to a folk club and know what we're going to hear
Since when has the standard one been useless - it continues to be used to identify huge collections of songs such as 'The Carpenter Collection, and The Gavin Greig 8 volume set
It may have come "useless" or more likely 'inconvenient' to a dwindling bunch of folkies who would rather listen to something else, but until you get around to burning the previous collections and researched works, I'm afraid folk remains what it means - 'The voice of the people
Sorry 'bout that
Ican keep this up as long as you can - I'm answering ypur points - you are ignoring mine
I'm learning more and more when that happens
Once again - nothing to do with "my experience - plenty of evidence beyond that - where's yours - none of you has come anything near to bringing together Van Diemans Land and the songs of The Kinks?
Jim