[r-t] Minor Blocks: Poll results

[Iain Anderson]

Iain A:
 > Is Plain Hunt a method?

MBD:
 > Yes. It has a 2-change lead.

Tim Barnes:
 > I'd clarify that the name given to the method with this 2-change lead in
 > the CC Method Collections is Original.  There isn't a method in the
 > Collections with the name Plain Hunt.

This is something that I have always found absurd.  The most commonly 
rung method on a practice night, the method that all ringers are taught, 
isn't recognised by the current decisions.  How does one explain to a 
grass-roots ringer that Plain Hunt isn't a method, and expect to be 
taken seriously?
Surely something has got to give in any future decisions.  Either:
A) Plain Hunt is still not recognised as a method.
B) It is a method with a 2-change(/row) lead.
     B.1) We allow methods to have multiple names, e.g., Plain Hunt and 
Original.
     B.2) We don't allow multiple names.  Original is deleted from the 
records.
C) It is a 12-change(/row) lead, which isn't the minimum non-divisible 
block.

I would be interested to hear from anyone who a) doesn't want multiple 
names for the same method, and b) wants a lead to be the minimum 
non-divisible block, why it is that they don't want Plain Hunt to be 
recognised as a method or why they want to delete Original?

IJA