[r-t] Doubles 240s

[James White]

Richard Johnston wrote:

>> I agree with JEC that call changes don't involve the identity change,
>> and nor would full-pull method ringing (which I would support).


What?  Am I missing something here?  When we repeat a row, we have rung the
identity change.
Every other change in full-pull method ringing is the identity change.

Isn't a "change" the passage from one row to the next and therefore there
must be a "change" to pass from, say, rounds to rounds.  I think we have to
move away from the concept that a "change" (technical usage) means that
things must change (every day usage).  Sure, that is where the word came
from, but we are able to understand that staying the same is just zero
change.  I know it took many centuries for zero to be accepted as a number
but it is.  Likewise, for all that people may not like it, the identity
change is a change (technical sense).

Whether we want to allow it in peals is a separate question and it actually
helps to have it named to have that discussion.

Let's move on.

James