Anyone care to name a temperament?

There have been complaints I name far too many temperaments around
here, so I hope someone will help me out.

Name: ???

Seven limit projection: meantone

Wedgie: [1, 4, 10, 18, 4, 13, 25, 12, 28, 16]

TM comma basis: [81/80, 99/98, 126/125]

Mapping: [[1, 2, 4, 7, 11], [0, -1, -4, -10, -18]]

TOP: [1201.611156, 1899.198965, 2790.351234, 3371.044615, 4145.302457]

Ets: 12, 31, 43, 74

The rules are that you can propose any name except "meantone".

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:
> There have been complaints I name far too many temperaments around
> here, so I hope someone will help me out.

But I also complained that far too many temperaments get named far too
early (by anyone). And then later when more is learned about them
other names seem more appropriate and if we change we cut ourselves
off from existing material on it in the archives. Whereas if we just
stuck to _describing_ it until a name was really needed, we wouldn't
have this problem.

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Keenan" <d.keenan@b...> wrote:
> --- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
> wrote:
> > There have been complaints I name far too many temperaments around
> > here, so I hope someone will help me out.
>
> But I also complained that far too many temperaments get named far too
> early (by anyone). And then later when more is learned about them
> other names seem more appropriate and if we change we cut ourselves
> off from existing material on it in the archives. Whereas if we just
> stuck to _describing_ it until a name was really needed, we wouldn't
> have this problem.

Given this position, you can hardly complain about what names other
people chose. You are either on the bus or off the bus.