"It has been suggested that the term 'mediation' is meaningless or useless because it is possible to distinguish a many different sorts of mediation."

Assuming this comment refers to my posts, it doesn't cover my range of objections to the term.

1. According to its general definition it's a broad, nonspecific term which can describe a considerable range of transactions.

2. Its usage in Fakesong is almost always pejorative, so to apply it in a wider context risks appearing condemnatory, whether or not this is the intention. In the present discussion there have been examples of finger-pointing and cries of 'mediator!' reminiscent of a 17th century witchfinder.

3. Its usage in Fakesong is also indiscriminate, involving its application to a variety of practices that are not comparable. Thus even in this narrow context it still requires additional qualification. This can lead (again, there are examples in the present discussion) of angels-on-a-pinhead arguments about whether a given practice can be described as 'mediation' or not.

4. It simply hasn't caught on. The literature, both ante- and post- Fakesong makes little or no use of it. For instance, I've recently been looking at the collection of essays entitled 'Folksong: Tradition, Revival and Re-Creation' (2004, eds. Russell and Atkinson) and, although several articles cover the work of collectors, the word 'mediation' scarcely appears, with the exception of David Atkinson's essay 'Revival: Genuine or Spurious', in which it is used once, in speech marks, and then rejected. Martin Graebe's biography of Baring-Gould devotes plenty of space to the Reverend's (somewhat notorious) editorial practices, but again doesn't refer at all to 'mediation'. It seems that it's only in this little corner of Mudcat that anyone is bothering with it at all.

I rest my case.