[r-t] Definitions so far

[Don Morrison]

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Mark Davies <mark at snowtiger.net> wrote:
> Our job is more dull: find a nice way of describing what is currently being
> rung. That includes methods with any number of hunt bells, any number of
> leads, and false in the plain course.

How is that different than the current situation? The core of the
current decisions were crafted when no one had bothered to ring
methods false in their plain courses, had not rung any of these
esoteric link methods, and hadn't rung any of the differential
extensions of Bristol. They probably adaquately described the state of
the art when they were first crafted.

Then folks rang new things and all hell has broken loose. They didn't
fit into the tidy schema that had been dutifully built around what was
then "currently rung", and so another arm was sewn onto the middle of
the head, a pocket was cut behind the left knee into which a third
eyeball could be poked, and the right little toe became a new sensory
organ, of a kind never before imagined. Giving us the wonderful
creature we have today.

If all we do is codify what folks have rung today, will not our
children be having the same fight all over again? Quite likely with
us?


-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"History, Stephen said, is a nightmare from which I am
trying to awake."         -- James Joyce, _Ulysses_