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

[Matthew Frye]

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.

MF