FW: Listed bells, why are they listed?

[Richard Offen]

--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "Bickerton, Roderic K 
\(SELEX\) \(UK\)" <roderic.bickerton at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> why are they listed?
> I asked this of George, and am now throwing it open. I am not
> criticizing George, he is probably to busy to answer me more fully.
> Perhaps I need to provide more information. They are in a typical T
> Mears 2 shoe horned in and much cut about frame, subject to more
> butchery at a later date.
> I hope this can go!
> 
> I was a bit surprised to see them listed. Not a complete ring. 
> 3 is a real brute and would have to be retired if it could not, or 
not
> be allowed to be tuned. The others would not need to much doing.
> I have been advised the T Mears 2 tenor would probably tune down 
quite
> well, it is nearly a semi sharp. 
> 

Where on earth are we talking about?   ...or have I missed something 
obvious?

Richard