Regarding designating a pair to chain, or do anything else:

If we introduced the concept of corner positions as ECD uses the term, for within the hands four (as opposed to contra corners which extends beyond it), you could just say --corners chain.  Whoever happened to be there would chain, whether gent, lady, lark, raven, what have you.  "On the second corner chain" from becket, would mean the ladies chain, but from improper, facing across, second corners chain would be gents, chaining from the right.  And we could equally call first corners chain from either of those positions with the opposite result.  Getting people used to corners would mean you could call any two person move without designating a gendered role.  Every pairing can be named: partner, neighbor, shadow, 1's, 2's, either corner, in short waves-centers or ends, in long waves in-facers and out-facers.  People might need to be more precise about fractional things.  This is not necessarily bad.

If we do as Michael has, still keeping role names, we need to be careful how we describe the courtesy turn.  He said 'gents pull by left then courtesy turn (the one they meet)'.  Often courtesy turn is described thus, as something done to another.  I like using the word 'with' to  make it the more mutual movement it is.  It might need to be emphasized that the crosser is the one who moves forward and the receiver the one who backs up.

First stab,

Andrea

On Mar 23, 2017, at 3:16 PM, Roger Diggle diggle@contrawise.net [trad-dance-callers] <trad-dance-callers@yahoogroups.com> wrote: