[r-t] Minor Blocks

[Graham John]

Tim wrote:

> But in the case of 6ths place Morning Star, telling
> the treble ringer who thought he'd been treble bob
> hunting that he was actually on a working bell, and
> therefore can have the footnote 'First inside' if it
> was something publishable, would seem to leave
> the rules open to a lot of criticism from ringers at
> large, however sound the logic behind this.

This sort of thing is easy to contrive anyway (e.g. by constructing a peal
of Bob Major where the second plain hunts throughout), so it doesn't make a
compelling argument.

It makes sense in a classification system to ensure that you cannot have
multiple names for the same method. As a minimum (and neither of these are
currently included in Tim's definitions):

1) A method is defined by the shortest sequence of changes, that when
repeated zero to many times, produces a round block.
2) Starting the sequence from a different change does not give a different
method, so two round blocks that are rotations of one another both define
the same method.*

It is important to note that this does not preclude Don's example of
defining a method as a bobbed lead of Cambridge S Major followed by a Plain
lead, or indeed redefining any touch as a method, provided it meets the
criteria above. 

Graham

*Consideration should however be given to addressing the Grandsire/New
Grandsire problem.