[r-t] A tentative question about principles

[Philip Earis]

John:
"I was party to a discussion at the 12-bell final with much more theoretically inclined ringers than I ever was or will be, about whether "principle" is a meaningful category.  The discussion ended in the usual purchase of further pints.  Can anyone provide an idiot's guide to current nomenclature, and whether it is of any practical use?"

A "principle" is the name given to a method that has no hunt bell(s). 

A principle is therefore a sub-category of method. All principles are methods, but not all methods are principles.

The question about meaningful is in the eye of the beholder.  In this beholder's eye, it is more meaningful than most descriptors.

Original (plain hunt), Stedman and Erin are the most commonly-rung principles.

Is there more detailed information you're after?



DISCLAIMER:

This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or copyright material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other person without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has been carefully formulated but is necessarily based on the information available, and the RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or completeness. In this respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall not be liable for any resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges that a disclaimer cannot restrict liability at law for personal injury or death arising through a finding of negligence. The RSC does not warrant that its emails or attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on your own screening.