[Bell Historians] standards of research

[jimhedgcock]

--- What do you do when you take the trouble to indicate mistakes on 
websites and no action is taken, even after you have received a reply 
stating that they are aware of the mistake/s? And what do you do when 
towers continue to display bell details that are incorrect, even when 
they know that they are incorrect?
I gave up!

In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "Mark Humphreys" 
<mark.humphreys at b...> wrote:
> Today's discussion made me think to trawl back through some old 
emails
> on the subject:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Bryant [mailto:david at b...] 
> > Sent: 01 September 2003 22:43
> > To: Bell Historians
> > Subject: [Bell Historians] standards of research
> > 
> > It is only necessary to look at some of the complete 
> > drivel on 'bell details/history' sections of individual tower 
> > websites to see what I mean! I won't pick on individual 
> > examples, but a number can be found by following the links on 
> > Roger Bailey's page.
> > 
> > So what do people think? Is there any way we can set and 
> > encourage standards in research?
> 
> Help them, not patronise them. They may the members of any proposed
> bell history society. I, for one, would be strongly against 
alienating
> those who members on this list may propose to lead. We all started
> somewhere. I started from a purely historical point of view, and 
would
> not claim to know a Doncastor canon/head/bugger cares what if it 
hit mew
> in the face (though I'm sure it would hurt me if I did). I am, 
however,
> passionately interested in the history of bells and bellringing.
> 
> Are these two viewpoints incompatible?
> 
> Mark