[r-t] A simpler approach?

[John Harrison]

> Please can someone on the Methods or Admin Committee (both 
> represented on this list) give an update as to the progress that has been
> made since the CC meeting?

I attended the Admin Committee meeting on 18 October.  My paper had been
circulated with the meeting papers.  
See:  http://jaharrison.me.uk/New/Articles/DecisionsReview.pdf 

The Methods Committee did not circulate anything in advance.  

Peter Niblett made a verbal statement at the meeting, much of which
described the different categories of decision with a few words about each
and how one might go about reviewing them.  I didn't make detailed notes
but a lot of it seemed to repeat what was in my paper.   The implication
(I think) was that the Methods Committee would carry on thinking about it.
 
I asked Peter whether they had considered the fundamental problem that to
define a method you had to ring it in a peal but that peals had to be in
methods of a type already defined.  Tony Smith replied, saying that they
had solved that problem by allowing blocks, so anybody could ring anything
in a peal.  

There wasn't much debate (possibly influenced by the meeting running a lot
later than scheduled). 

I have not yet seen minutes of the meeting, but my recollection at the time
was that the Methods Committee was instructed to come up with a
substantive response by the end of the year.  

Regards

-- 
John Harrison
Website http://jaharrison.me.uk