[r-t] A Ringing Puzzle

[Graham John]

PABS wrote:

> Non-method blocks do not have leads. 

So what is the non-method block in the case of Don's puzzle method A? One
lead? The whole course? If the latter it definitely has leads (repeating
blocks of changes)

There doesn't seem to be a requirement for a non-method block to be true?
So what is the non-method block in Oxford Treble Bob Minimus? Is it a lead
(which is false) or the plain course? Can this now be ring in peals. Bristol
Minimus too? 

Does Horsleydown Surprise Major or the Ringing World Centenary touch qualify
as either a non-method block or a Hunter now, or neither?

> Dixons can be described as a composition of Plain Bob.

It can, but it is not how it is rung. It is rung as a rule based method and
has a dynamic rather than static place notation, hence my definition of a
rule based method like Dixon's as a different type of method below. 

"methods where the changes are determined dynamically by rules based upon
the position of bells in the previous row or rows"

> I am genuinely surprised at the amount of
> opposition to the motion

I cannot see the top down logic that Richard was describing and the changes
introduce complexity, ambiguity, and inconsistency that means I am very
unclear what the answers to these questions and many others are. Anyone
should be able to look at the decisions (and I would like to codify them in
programs) to define categorically what something is called without having to
refer to the Methods Committee for interpretation.

Graham

"I thought I was a method ringer, now I am not so sure."