Ringing Forums

nobody is talking about "culling" anybody, but for all group activities it's a fact of life that there will be a wide range of abilities and that it's in everyone's best interests if the match between people in a particular group is satisfactory for everyone involved. And ability isn't a fixed thing either.

There's a monthly 8-bell QP group in an association I ring in, I'd love to ring in it but I don't yet have the necessary skills (although I'm working on it). You can either see that as being exclusionary, or realistic - if they want to build their skills and score regular QPs then they need people who can do that. Or take a visiting band that's coming to our tower to ring a Surprise Major QP. Would it be reasonable to expect them to include any of our ringers? No.

It’s true that extempore groupings of particular abilities and preferences will arise in any group activity – it will always be thus, and of itself it can enrich the activity to the general benefit by ‘raising the average’. But for any group activity to survive, it must have the ability to encompass the needs and aspirations of the least competent / least knowledgeable as well as the more / most advanced.

Your QP grouping example is not exclusionary - it exists as an attractant for those of similar skills and aspirations and it’s future existence and growth or decline will be amorphous. That QP group can be, and most probably is somewhat peripatetic.

However, the ringing room at each tower at which such a group may ring must accommodate, (albeit at other times), the people of least knowledge / experience seeking to enter into the activity, and without whom the Exercise will wither and die. I laud those with the ability to advance their own knowledge / experience and thereby better the knowledge / experience base of ringing nationally, but those people need to acknowledge that, by monopolising practice sessions, they are consciously or subconsciously debarring those of “less than adequate” qualification.

A tower near me has their practice evenings in two parts, the boundary between the parts being adjusted in accordance with the number and needs of the beginners / least experienced ringers. The result? The home band has progressed steadily from having a small proportion of experienced ringers supporting a larger proportion of “beginners” to being a more homogenous group most of whom are steadily increasing their personal repertoires. Yet this has not shut the door to individuals coming in at the bottom and being welcomed at the first part of the practices.

But for any group activity to survive, it must have the ability to encompass the needs and aspirations of the least competent / least knowledgeable as well as the more / most advanced. — Mike Shelley

If you are talking about an individual practice then that's like saying Sunday League players should be able to rock up at Premiership practices. If you are talking about ringing as a whole then yes, or course, different practices are at different levels.

I've seen what happens to practices that try to be "all things to all men". The learners get pissed off because there are too many of them and they spend most of their time sitting out and making glacial progress, they often quit ringing. The experienced ringers don't mind ringing in support but when it gets to the point where they don't get any ringing that's "for them", they get pissed off and stop coming as well. There's a happy medium but maintaining it can be difficult, takes a lot of planning and if the imbalance gets too severe (on either side), impossible.

Your QP grouping example is not exclusionary — Mike Shelley

Really? It's invite-only.

those people need to acknowledge that, by monopolising practice sessions, they are consciously or subconsciously debarring those of “less than adequate” qualification. — Mike Shelley

In my experience the majority of any "monopolising" is done by the "Determined Underachievers" who will blissfully crash about for an entire practice unless they are asked to sit down.

A tower near me has their practice evenings in two parts — Mike Shelley

Yes, they've solved the problem by having two practices at two different levels on the same day.

I’m sorry that you choose not to give thought what I’d written and choose to conflate the general and the specific or differentiate as the fancy takes you without due consideration. To pretend that losing learners because there are too many at practices is daft as that means that, in that particular area, there are simply too few appropriately structured practices to cater for those interested in taking up ringing.

“…practices that try to be "all things to all men"…” Lucky bands, having a surfeit of potential ringers, and shame on those bands for not adapting to suit their luck. As for the experienced ringers, they’ll have plenty of options available so if they don’t have the temperament to pass on those skills they themselves have acquired on the back of the efforts of their predecessors then, perhaps, the bands are better off without them.

“…invite-only…” QP group being “exclusionary” or not? – the context was practices in home towers, which potential learners and beginners are aware of as they are public knowledge, they’re hardly excluded from a private group having the capacity to ring anywhere as those newcomers won’t comprehend the existence that entity.

“…the majority of any "monopolising" is done by the "Determined Underachievers"…” Such intolerance without posing any potential solution is demeaning of the group that exhibits it. That Barbara couched her question in the terms she did rather indicate that her perception of the problem is different to yours, and that she is open to suggestions regarding solutions rather than polarising rhetoric.

And I'm sorry you've decided to persistently misrepresent what I've said. I'm done with this exchange.

Dear Friends, sorry I have inadvertently precipitated an argument. We are all on the same side, really :). Please do kiss and make up :)

Can it really be 6 months ago that I asked my question? Since then I have had to accept that the collective decision of my band is to stick with ringing at a low level, with plenty of socialising (they really all are genuinely nice to each other).

This strikes me as being just like what the church we are attached to has had to accept - that too few people are interested in coming there to practise religion for that to be a viable option. Instead, they are looking at turning the church into a community asset. So I am trying to use my influence as Tower Captain to encourage our band to participate in that. Then at least I will feel I have done something useful.

At the moment, if we did get some keen ringers, we could still turn back and face the other way (i.e. towards serious change ringing), but anno domini means we aren't going to have the capable ringers to do that for ever.