Seriously you realized you've just told everyone that your critiques of their material are completely useless because you are completely unable to comprehend another's point of view and therefore not able to effectively talk about anyone else's work in terms of their goals and musical preference. Not only that but your point of view is so incredibly narrow minded that you cannot even work as an example of an average response to someones music. There for you can't even help people who want to sell their music by acting as a reference for some demographic of the population. Because you refuse to except new interpretations of your old ideas into your thought process you have become mentally impotent, at least when it comes to critiquing music.
Of course I suppose you could help someone become just like you, however after your last post/tantrum I doubt the existence of a willing candidate.
Perhaps me and you aren't that different though, for instance my first love is drawing, and other forms of visual art. In that sense my interest are extremely traditional in the sense that I strive to become exceedingly proficient technically. I have been studying anatomy for the past two years in order to better (more accurately) express the human figure. I now go to a design/art school at the a University. Although I wish to follow in the foot steps of the people I hold to be some of the greatest artist of all time (Bouguereau, Raphael, Michelangelo, Goya to name a few of my favs) I would certainly not say that this is a common goal in the art world today. In fact realism has been "out of style" for more than a century. It is not taught in art schools in any direct matter, and is even discouraged by many (well meaning) professors. I have a very traditionalist approach to art.
NONE of my peers share my desire, I know no other person at my school who has interest in realism (I don't mean there are none anywhere obviously but they are hard to find in art schools). However, I don't let other peoples opinions, biases, and the preferences of the entire art world dissuade me from the goals I have for myself. I have set these goals based on what I deem valuable to me and what I wish to achieve with my work. However, that does not mean that I consider contemporary painting wrong or incorrect. Do I think some people can't draw... well yeah because some people can't, just as some people can't rhyme I suppose. However that doesn't mean that their painting is not a painting, nor does it mean that my painting is not a painting. They are both paintings. When critiquing some else's painting I don't say, "Well you drew everything completely wrong" when they have constructed a abstract work of art. I approach their work with the expectations they have for their work and try to help them reach their personal goals, by giving them feed back based on those goals. I do not interject my own goals onto their painting because my ideas have no legitimacy when applied to someone else's work.
The same is true for song writing, you can rhyme because thats what is important to you and I can put lyrics that don't rhyme into my songs and we are both still writing songs. However to critique my work by saying that it does not rhyme is not fair or correct because my intent was not to rhyme.
Perhaps it was better to just explain it to you in an anecdote in stead of just calling you closed minded, perhaps you just simply didn't understand.
But you can see now I hope how I have no need to reword definitions to make myself feel better. There are always two definitions of a concept, such as "song". A private and a public. Your private is what that word means to you while your public definition needs to encompass a wider spectrum of ideas, or as I have already said you become mentally impotent when expressing your self and talking to others about the concept. There is really only one definition I guess but it's just a way of saying you can have your song and I can have mine and we both still have songs.
