[r-t] Poll on consecutive blows in the same position

Matthew Frye matthew at frye.org.uk
Sun Dec 28 00:28:45 UTC 2014

On 27 Dec 2014, at 23:49, Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Matthew Frye <matthew at frye.org.uk> wrote:
>> I don't remember if I made the point here or somewhere more private, but I
>> am of the opinion that there might be a case for considering "link methods",
>> such as shown by DFM (and many other examples), as something other than a
>> "method" per se,
> Was that not exactly the rationale for the (I believe seriously
> ill-advised) creation of what the CCCBR now calls "non-method blocks"?

I feel there's something different, but can't quite articulate what. I do take the point though.

Regardless of other considerations, I do think that a call should be able to add rows as well as alter or remove them. I further believe that modification would mean that many (but not all) link methods would be better described as calls than as methods. Discussion for another day.


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list