[r-t] New methods (was Old methods)

[Don Morrison]

With this postulated new "provisional list" am I correct in presuming
that it is proposed that the CCCBR Decisions be amended so that the
provisional names there stick, so that folks ringing the same thing
again use the same name. This is in contrast to the current
provisional list maintained by the CCCBR Methods Committee.

If I understand it correctly this current list contains only methods
that are otherwise acceptable to the committee, but were rung under
circumstances that do not allow naming a method, such as in a peal
that was non-compliant* in some other way, or in a quarter.

My understanding is that inclusion on this list in no way obligates a
band ringing them in the future to reuse the name provisionlly
applied.

I don't know for sure, but I doubt many folks consult this list when
choosing names for methods they ring for what they believe is the
first time. If it's not in the official list, it's largely invisible.
Adding to their invisibility, no doubt, is that such provisional
methods are not included in the committe's own All Class Method Index.

It also worth noting that there are further innovations that such a
list does not address. For example, had variable cover not been made
legal the hard way, a provisional method list would not have made it
any more acceptable. And yes, yes, I know variable cover has not
proved popular to date--I believe that is all the more reason the
Council's behaviour should be such that new things are not rejected
out of hand, as that is what forced the Council to make such massive
changes to the Decisions to accommodate a rarely rung feature. When
the next such example comes along I do hope Robin is correct and the
Council's behaviour better matches his reading of Decision (D)E.

*The Council's use of "non-compliant" for peals from which they chuck
 out the naming of methods is yet another example of language applying
 a seemingly pejorative term to innovative performances. If the
 Council were following Robin's intrepetation of Decision (D)E., which
 is the one I favour though it appears from the Council's behaviour it
 does not, the fault is not with the peal, but rather with the
 Council's descriptive mechanism. It would be better to choose a
 term expressing that distinction. Perhaps an "unclassifiable peal"
 rather than a "non-compliant peal"?



-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"Things that try to look like things often do look more like
things than things. Well-known fact."   -- Terry Pratchett, _Wyrd Sisters_