[r-t] Synergy of two threads: New Grandsire meets method extension

[Philip Saddleton]

Don Morrison wrote:
> All this discussion of New Grandsire, combined with a recent rereading
> of the Decision on method extension, has me wondering about an obscure
> point.
>
> C. 1. (a) says "In this Part it is assumed that the method is started
> from a change such that the treble is the hunt bell or a principal
> hunt."
>
> Imagine a method with N principal hunts. There are typically N
> distinct rotations that meet the above criterion. Let's call them R1,
> R2, ... RN.
>
> Is a legal extension of, say, R2, guaranteed to be a rotation of a
> legal extension of R1? 
Not as currently formulated, though I would expect it to be the case for 
all but the most pathological examples. Another shortcoming of the way 
the Decision is presented.

Philip