[r-t] Minor Blocks

[Don Morrison]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Tim Barnes <tjbarnes23 at gmail.com> wrote:
> And then to whether 2 leads of Cambridge can be named as a
> separate method to Cambridge, etc.

If someone is daft enough to want to do so, it doesn't seem worth
either the effort, or the cost (for example, your treble to Morning Star
example), to stop them. And while I can't think of any non-daft reason
for pretending two leads of Cambridge are one lead, that doesn't mean
folks cleverer than I won't think of one in the future, and it would
be a shame to deny them the opportunity.

And really, is it any worse than the differential treble place major
method

x3x4x25x36x4x5x6x7x6x5x4x36x25x4x3x4,2

rung with half-lead bobs in 12? I don't think anyone is trying to stop
that, and the two plain leads instead version at least has the virtue
of being a bit more honest.

If someone does ring either such method and name it, it seems unlikely
anyone else will do so after them, making it just like so many other
methods that have been rung, named and forgotten. If that happens,
what harm has been done, to whom?



-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods
or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
            -- Thomas Jefferson, _Notes on the State of Virginia_