[r-t] Fwd: MC consultation

[Roddy Horton]

My response is below


Allow methods that are false in the plain course.
Although a method may be false in the plain course, a part eg a lead, of the method may be used to good effect within a peal composition and therefore methods false in the plain course should be allowed.

Relax the requirement for bells to be heard outside the tower.
I do not believe this to be within the remit of the methods committee.

Allow peals on simulators.
I do not believe this to be within the remit of the methods committee.

Allow a wider range of peal constructions.
I support this. In fact I cannot see why a peal should not simply be 5000 or more changes on any number of bells, with suitable wording about repeats of rows on less than 7 bells. Why is 5008 Plain Bob Major recognised but not 5012 Plain Bob Triples?

Relax the conditions on how a peal is performed.
I do not believe this to be within the remit of the methods committee.

I do think the whole area of Extension should be reviewed from scratch. I think a fundamental flaw has historically been made relating to the constraints around place notation within method extension. Place notation is an efficient  method of describing what the method is and should not be used as a measure of valid extension. I understand that using place notation allows for complex formula to be defined but I believe that basic thinking is a mistake. The ‘Beverley Surprise’  fiasco supports this view.

Roddy Horton