[r-t] Methods Committee review of decisions

[Iain Anderson]

On 2015-01-17 17:34, Don Morrison wrote:
> Perhaps I've not being paying proper attention, but I've not seen any
> annoucment of this page. It will likely be of interest to many on this
> list. Thank you to Graham John who first brought it to my attention.
>
> http://www.methods.org.uk/review/index.htm

Well, on the plus side, it is a review.  Not sure I would describe it as 
fundamental.
My favourite bit is the new name for Meson:
Meson False Differential Little Hybrid Maximus.
Can somebody please explain to me why we need so many classifications, 
especially since none of those that apply to Meson are useful for 
learning or ringing the method?
What is wrong with having a general classification for miscellaneous 
methods so that it could simply be called Meson Maximus as the composer 
intended?
IJA