[r-t] Old methods

[Ted Steele]

Don Morrison wrote: concerning CC "Decisions":
> One further point. Even if we were to believe that the Decisions don't
> stifle innovation, the way in which they are promulgated certainly
> punishes it:
>
> - The first peal of variable cover that was rung still does not appear
>   in the Council's analyses. When the Decisions were amended to make
>   variable cover "legal" the only peal of it that had been rung up
>   until then was explicitly, and I believe spitefully, not granted the
>   legitimacy that subsequent peals of it are accorded. So what the
>   Council would have us believe is the first peal of the stuff, is
>   presumably the second.
>
> - Long before differential hunter methods became "legal" I believe
>   peals had been rung that contained them. At least one of spliced
>   plain royal with some three lead course methods, and I seem to
>   recall there were some others, as well. These peals were chucked
>   out, and the bands that rang them were not entitled to name the
>   methods. Now that they are legal there has been no effort to
>   recognize the ground breaking work that went on, I think decades
>   earlier, and let the names proposed by the earlier bands stand.
>
> - I'm am confident other examples of similar non-recognition of past
>   performaces that meet current Decisions could be found.
>
> So the reward for doing something new is that you get slapped in the
> face by the Council, but others get to do what you did with the
> Council's blessing.
>   
I have come late to this discussion. I wonder whether it would help for 
the CC to record (and thereby recognise as significant) innovative 
peals,calls, methods etc. in a "Provisional" list and transfer to 
"Established" lists when and if sufficient further performances by 
different bands take place to demonstrate acceptance by the exercise. 
Being able to see readily what is established and what remains 
provisional would make it easier to see what trends in ringing research 
and experiment are under way and what interest they are gaining. It's 
just a thought and I guess it might require quite a bit of work for 
record keepers. An advantage would be that the Exercise at large would 
determine what becomes established simply by ringing and submitting it 
and the CC would simply record what takes place without seeking to 
judge. "Decisions" would become obsolete and the original names of 
methods etc. would be preserved.

Ted