[r-t] nths place

[Matthew Frye]

On 16 Jul 2014, at 15:26, Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org> wrote:
> What horrible thing happens if the
> band at Little Snitchet rings a peal of treble bob minor with an
> extent containing some sixth place Morning Star, and another band at
> Great Bludgerington rings a peal of differential minor methods
> containing some of the differential cognate to sixth place Morning
> Star?

What if the band a Great Bludgerington rang what we would know as 6th place Morning Star (or whatever it's actually been named) and tried to claim they'd rung a new method called Great Bludgerington Treble Bob? Would you that to be OK? I don't think many would. I think uniqueness of named methods *is* very important, as is recognising methods and those who created them, so I think we do need to think very carefully about where we draw the lines of "same" and "different".

Is intent enough to differentiate two methods? Is a record-keeping trick of writing out the p.n. a different number of times enough? I don't currently have good answers, and may be inclined to agree with you, but these are important questions and you sometimes seem to be trying to brush them off as not relevant.

MF