[r-t] The important points
mark at snowtiger.net
Sun Jun 8 17:05:28 UTC 2014
Philip Earis writes,
> Mark, in the nicest possible way your "Norwich Axioms" were
> fatally flawed because they started with the existing
> patched-up Decisions as the framework and tried to
> improve things by deleting some of the crazier bits.
With all due respect Philip, that was absolutely not the case. The
underlying framework is quite independent, and, I would argue, clean,
orthogonal and theoretically sound.
Of course the axioms were based on the existing ideas of what is a hunt
bell, what is a treble-dodging path, and so on. And I couched the whole
thing as an amendment to the existing "Decisions". It would certainly be
quite nice to rephrase the whole thing in more natural English, as in an
example I have in my inbox from a Mr Tim Barnes.
But, I think the Norwich Axioms would have been a whole lot better than
what we have now. I think the fatal flaw was the mysterious way
supporters got elected to the Methods Committee but then failed to make
More information about the ringing-theory