Ringing Forums

by 'booming out' do you mean that. it is too loud, in which case a lighter clapper might help, regardless of material.
If it's not too loud but qualitatively different then maybe it is a quality of the bell rather than the clapper, especially since you say it has always been like it.
Either way, it would seem sensible to seek professional advice.

That's the same link you posted a couple of weeks ago. Did you mean to post a different one?

A lot of those Hamiltonian paths are likely to be not asymmetric single lead methods that aren't nice to ring.
I assume you got the figure from the article on the web by polster & Ross, but I don't remember them using diagrams.
To see how the diagram is derived you might be interested in: https://jaharrison.me.uk/Ringing/RingingShapes/.

flightiness is more about the rope than the bell.

Angels and pins come to mind. Anything complex will have edge cases.
Think from a practical perspective:
"Go Great Massingham"
If you are ringing four you don't need telling that it's Minimus, and at that point you probably aren't interested in the class.
Now compare with:
"Go -1234-1234-14.34.14-1234-12,34".
Really?
If names weren't useful humanity wouldn't have invented them.

they could just provide a list of the rows that were rung — PeterScott

They could but that would not be very convenient for either them or anyone reading about it.
The aim of the Framework, or any naming system, is to enable more compact description without loss of accuracy.

interesting criticism of DCMS for misinterpreting the convention by assuming that beyond creating a UK inventory it doesn't imply any commitment to actually do anything to safeguard cultural heritage, just to make people in the UK aware, and that it doesn't intend to submit anything to UNESCO (supposedly 'for the first few years').

there's nothing wrong with ringing this however I'm surprised to be seeing accepted as a method. — J Martin Rushton

There is indeed nothing wrong with ringing it, so if someone does ring it how should they describe it?
The rationale behind the development of the Framework for Method Ringing was to provide the tools to describe what people choose to ring, rather than to determine that some things were legitimate, and by implication others were not.
The aim was that from a report of the ringing it would be clear what was rung, with any aspect that would not reasonably be assumed made explicit. Anyone who wanted to form a judgment about it would be free to do so, but judgements would not be centrally imposed.
This was extensively discussed and publicised at the time, several years ago now.

if they were competent ringers they could continue, but learners should stop — J Martin Rushton

I've not heard that, but a competent ringer will certainly impose less severe stresses on the body than someone less competent. But that's not the same as learner v non-learner. On the one hand some established ringers ring in a way that could put sudden extreme stresses on joints and muscles and on the other a responsive student who has Ben coached from the start to develop a smooth efficient style could probably moderate the risk of over stress.

When I was young age wasn't an issue. We were encouraged as youngsters and older ringers were respected for their experience. But that was at a time when the Exercise had a younger profile and was growing.
Things are different now, we have a much older age profile, numbers are falling and there are societal barriers to youth recruitment. We need to think about age. So why do we keep making it into a divisive issue?
It's a fact that on average some things slow down with age. But individuals vary a lot, and in many cases more than the 'average' effect. There's nothing special about any particular age, 62, 32, 82, or whatever, they are in a continuum, with a lot of variation at each one.
It's a fact that the age profile of ringers has become skewed to the point of probably being unsustainable so we ought to correct that with more young recruits 'on average'. But that doesn't mean that a promising ringer of any age shouldn't be recruited, taught, encouraged and developed.
The example quoted earlier proves the point, with an older person making faster progress than a younger one. And I once taught a 50 year old who took half the time that her son did to get to the same stage.
It's also true that a lifelong ringer who starts earlier will ring for more years than one who starts later. But sadly a lot of ringers don't become lifelong ringers, so at what ever age we recruit we should be trying to attract and encourage those who will become enthusiastic and committed.

I too am wary of putting personal information online. If you put your name, address, email, phone number and birthday in the public domain I suspect those who commit online crime, identity theft, fraud etc. will be delighted — Alan C

Yes, but that's not a reason to be fearful of putting anything online. The aim should be to provide what is useful for communication. For officers our branch website shows photo, name, generic email and phone number and for tower correspondents it shows generic email and phone number. The personal information is subject to consent but hardly anyone opts out.

I didn't say a lot of websites have an updated indicator, I said that a good one will. I suppose commercial websites don't have an incentive to do that, but I would have thought 'community' websites, like ringing ones, do because it gives confidence that they are being maintained. . The sites I manage all say when the site was updated on the home page, and most other pages include an automatically generated date. It's not rocket science.

agreed people know that a report is printed once a year whereas a website may be updated much more (or occasionally less) often, but in both cases there is no indication of whether a particular item has changed since then.
The difference is that if the information had changed since then a report will definitely be wrong whereas a website will probably be correct (but not guaranteed).
Most people are conscientious, and a website enables them to keep information up to date. A few are not conscientious, but don't blame that on the communication medium.
A good website will tell you when it was last updated. That doesn't guarantee everything on it will be correct but it's a good indication of how 'live' it is.

Websites have always suffered from being out of date the moment after they are publishe — Steve Farmer

Any more than printed reports?

we recently had a Tower Correspondent who declined to have their postal or email address or landline or mobile number published anywhere — PeterScott

I wonder what he/she thought the word 'correspondent' meant.

Thanks. I'll follow that up.

I don't know whether or not there are performance limitations, but there must be some downside or the bell hangers would use them for everything. I suspect they cost a bit more because there are more parts. They also have bolts that need checking for tightness, which a conventional clapper doesn't.

we generally try and avoid more than 2 learners to 1 handling instructor as we don't have the resources to offer instruction outside of the practice nights. — Tristan Lockheart

We do handling instruction separate from practice night in one to one sessions and in practice it would be difficult to manage more than one or two at a time.
However in the late 70s we took groups of 6 or 7 at a time, with one of us teaching thesm in the same session. I don't know how we managed it but we got amazing success rates. From memory of the first group, 6 started, 5 became regular ringers and 4 of them rang Surprise Major.

I heard it and I sent them an explanatory email. It will be interesting to see if I get a reply

it's now official CCCBR policy that adult learners aren't who ringing wants, — John de Overa

I wasn't aware of that. Can you give a link to the relevant policy?