[Bell Historians] RE: Bell Listing

[David Godwin]

Re Holy Trinity BoA 7th Richard Smith said: "I hadn't bothered to check the statement was true".

My point exactly, people don't, they assume an 'expert' has made an informed and accurate decision when releasing data for others to use. 

A lot of what is being done is with out being 100% sure of the facts. In a previous job I had it engrained into me that one NEVER puts into the public domain anything that you can't be 100% sure is accurate i.e. you have first hand evidence that you are right to back up your claim. Relying other peoples work is lazy especially when it is un-acknowledged and so I return to my point about actually visiting towers. 

I agree totally with Matthew on this one, there are far to many discrepancies in what is and isn't being listed eg. Preshute and Christchurch BoA. I make this comment based on knowing that the heavy eight at Westbury (wilts) has been listed because they are a particularly fine complete ring of bells by their founder so therefore shouldn't Christchurch BoA and for that matter Newcastle St John be listed?
Things are getting out of hand and risk being discredited because of the way things are being done due to the inconsistencies.

On a final point and one Richard didn't try to answer, but who (if anyone) is officially  notifying PCCs and ringers of these changes? ok I could do it in my home towers now because I have looked but only because Matthew and I were talking about this listing subject at work yesterday, what happens in the others towers like Westbury or Preshute?

David Godwin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20140107/0ff4236e/attachment.html>