[r-t] ?CCBR meeting - Methcom proposals

Ted Steele bells at tedsteele.plus.com
Mon May 30 22:14:14 UTC 2016

On 30/05/2016 20:45, James White wrote:
>>> 3. New methods can be named by ringing a quarter-peal (Triples and higher stages affected).
> Is this retroactive?
> Does it mean that methods provisionally named by a quarter peal band in the past should now be regarded as officially named, or does it need a further quarter peal this side of the rule change?

Having just watched the saved webcast I think I am right in saying that 
this question was asked and the answer was that it is not retroactive so 
a new performance will be rquired to name the method in such a case. It 
was said that it would be hoped people would respect provisional names  
of methods if ringing them again under the new rule but there was no 
requirement to so do.. Similalry, the question asked in another post 
about block names was asked at the meeting and answered to the effect 
that the word Block would remain as part of the method name but would 
not appear as a classification. I think it would clearly be better to 
invite the original bands to nominate a revised name and there must 
already be a mechanism for doing this. If I am mistaken then the actual 
answers can still be heard in the webcast which remains accessible. I 
only saw the bit before lunch; was the later session also streamed and 
is it available if so?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20160530/50bd3624/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list