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

[Mark Davies]

Don writes, of constructions with one bell not moving,

> This is not about taste. It's about describing what ringers do, or
> might do in the future.

I am describing it - as a block. Why does everything have to be a method 
in your world, Don?

Not sure about your "future" argument, either. In the 17th century 
change-ringing developed from called changes via plain changes to cross 
changes, with the aim of increasing the involvement of every bell in the 
ringing. In the light of that history, does it now make sense that e.g.

	345678.345678.345678.345678.345678.345678.345678.345678

can be said to be an 8-change Major method?

I'm not completely adverse to saying that yes, it is. But we might end 
up describing everything as a "method", including rounds for 10 blows. 
Do we want that? Doesn't a method imply change-ringing?

> Now I'm really confused. So if those quarters were instead of peal
> length, they'd be peals, but only partially change ringing?

Sigh. I was using "peal" in the old sense, i.e. "composition". To rephrase:

"As part of a composition where the bell *does* move; well that's
fine, so let's use the block concept to separate out the
non-change-ringing changes, and then combine the whole into a
change-ringing composition."

MBD