[r-t] Anything Goes vs Peals Mean Something
richard at ex-parrot.com
Fri Aug 8 14:05:01 BST 2008
Graham John wrote:
> But people ring false quarters, that doesn't make them acceptable.
Do they? Intentionally? That's news to me.
> Also, I am not necessarily convinced that exactly the same
> rules do have to apply to quarters as to peals.
Nor am I. But I do want the same basic definitions to apply
to peals and quarters. So 'true' should mean the same for
any piece of ringing irrespective of length. If the CC
don't want to require truth for quarters, but want it for
peals, I can accept that (though I don't agree with it).
Perhaps a better example, closer to the status quo, would be
that the CC might want to say that peals on triples or below
had to be 'true and complete' (to use the term I introduced
the other day -- i.e. a whole number of extents), but that
peals on higher stages, together with quarters on any stages
merely had to be 'true'.
More information about the ringing-theory