[r-t] Changes to decisions again

Leigh Simpson simple57uk at yahoo.co.uk
Mon Jan 23 14:03:09 UTC 2006

In my mind, what we really need is someone to retype
the decisions to see how they might look post-reform.
After all, convincing the council to scrap the old
rules may prove difficult without a workable

In a sense, I think the current "Decisions" should be
split into two documents, one containing general
bits-and-bobs, as well as the definition of what a
"peal" is, and the other to contain guidelines and
rules to describe the classification schemes for

So, taking these separately, what is a peal?

I would argue that it should:

 - Obey with everything in Section [A], except for
revising rule 3 (at a later date) to accomodate
cylindrical, and removing rule 11.

 - Contain >= n true rows, where n can be debated at a
later date.

 - Be uniquely describable and possible to recreate.

After that, it can be anything. It can contain
arbitrary lengths of place notation (which avoids the
need to produce link methods which are squeezed into
the methods rulings). It can be rule-based in some
way. It can consist of any numbers of methods for any
numbers, spliced at any point with any number of calls
at any points. Granted, nobody's going to do all this,
but *they can if they want to*

After that, the methods people can happily go through
classifying anything that people want to ring as a
method. So long as they get rid of differentials.


Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list