p100/p150

Couple of things:

  • I hope it’s ok to re-post the table on here - if not please tell me
  • Are there any disputes over the accuracy of the data in the table?

If it’s agreed this table is accurate then I think it’s pretty easy to see why our German friends might be upset!!!

Rob

Well, to make a start, the table does not distinguish the Associations that are in transition. Are you trying to give the impression that G, GW, GM, GI and EI are P100 by lumping everything together?

You have DM entered twice, I assume the second entry is supposed to be DL but it has the same area as DM, and your area for DM does not exclude the area of DL.

I could say more but I am very busy at the moment, but I may return to this later.

Brian

As Michael said, this is an intermediate result.
DM (P100) is DM as it is today.
DM (P150) displays DM if P150 applied.

Michael clearly marked the associations where P100 applies. I can see no lumping at all.

1 Like

@G7LAS
No problem posting the table here. The MT has received exactly the same table in their email.
I generated this table by simply looking up the number of summits on the SOTA website and the country area in wikipedia.de. So this is nothing absolutely exact and official but should match quite well.

As the MT does not publish such information and also does not inform the AMs like me personally, data regarding associations in transition is not available to me. Perhaps a point to rethink the MT’s information politics as OE5YYN has indicated in this thread already.

[quote=“G8ADD, post:39, topic:10456, full:true”]Are you trying to give the impression that G, GW, GM, GI and EI are P100 by lumping everything together?
[/quote]
This table lists G, GW, GM, GI and EI separately. As none of these associations is labelled P100 I do not claim they are P100. All associations without explicit prominence given in the table are P150. But you can clearly see, DM with P100 still has less summits per area than GW, GM, GI and GI with P150. Converting DM to P150 it will even have less summits per area than G!

So the idea of this table is: Even with P100 DM does not have an abnormal high number of summits regarding to area. I really wonder whether the MT wants to indicate, that DM is a flatter country than G (England, not Great Britain).

The two lines of DM correspond to the actual state of DM with P100 and the prospective DM with P150. I accept the argument, the area of DM has to be reduced somewhat to reflect the part of Germany covered by DL. Sorry my fault. But this will not change the result sigificantly.

73 de Michael, DB7MM - DM association manager

2 Likes

Then the point remains that you have included the area of DL in your DM calculation. By removing the area of DL you will improve the summit density figure.

Given our boundary figure of 2000 km^2, even your incorrect SD of 372 shows that the number of valid P150 summits is actually quite generous, many Associations are less well provided with P150 summits. To be making comparisons with other countries in an effort to show that DM has a summit deficiency is arguing with geography. It is what it is. Your summit density is skewed by the large area of the North German Plain, of course, but other countries have plains, too.

Brian

The following is a statement by the Management Team about the situation regarding P150/P100.

  1. SOTA is a P150 award scheme
  2. Dispensation is given to countries which cannot meet the P150 rule (based on summit density) to function as P100 Associations; but this is the exception not the rule
  3. The General Rules explain this – in the English language – with as much clarity as possible.
  4. There are other award schemes that allow for P100 or other criteria – HUMPS, GMA, WOTA etc
  5. Associations which are unwilling to abide by the General rules will be unable to provide listed summits that qualify for participation in the SOTA Award scheme. This does not preclude licensed amateurs and shortwave listeners in these countries participating in Activating and Chasing qualified summits in other Associations – as at present.
  6. The Management Team, who administer the Award scheme, will make every effort to ensure participating Associations conform to the General rules. Where technology advances allow then a review of the validity of Association lists will take place as required – all Associations may be subject to these periodic reviews. Reviews may find that the status quo is acceptable, that summits no longer qualify, or that other summits which would have qualified may be included during an annual revision of the Association manual. For the record this has resulted in 16 summits having been added to G/GD/GI/GM/GW and 15 have been deleted, following a revision of the underlying control data in the Relative Peaks of Britain.
  7. No Association is exempt from the conditions prescribed in the General Rules.
  8. Where the Management Team, for whatever reason, have made an error, whether through an innocent mistake or poor judgement, they will endeavour to rectify that error, in liaison with the Association, and ensure conformance to the General Rules. Where this correction will have an effect on the available scoring summits of an Association then the MT will allow a grace period before implementation of the new Association Summit List (generally a calendar year) to allow participators time to activate or chase summits which will be removed from the programme.
  9. Where errors have been identified in summits lists, or where summits are duplicated between Associations, the MT have received full cooperation from the relevant Association Manager to eliminate these discrepancies and ensure that the Association is fully compliant with the General Rules. The majority of these Associations, mainly located in Europe, are now, or shortly will be, fully compliant. The problems faced by the Association Managers have been overcome in a positive manner and in the spirit of cooperation which we all associate with the hobby of amateur radio.
  10. There is no debate on this issue. SOTA is an awards scheme administered by a small team of volunteers; SOTA is not a club, participants are not members and the decision whether or not to take part in this award scheme is solely the choice of the individual. The various facilities provided free of any charge at the point of use – SOTAwatch, the SOTA database, the reflector – are funded by the sale of awards and merchandise otherwise there is no cost to any radio amateur to take place in this scheme but it has to be recognised that the ultimate decision as to what qualifies for this award scheme lies with the SOTA Management Team.

On behalf of the Management Team.

10 Likes

By the way, Michael, this isn’t the way it should work. You should use the number of P150 summits divided into the surface area. If this gives a figure of greater than 2,000 then permission can be granted to use P100. Calculating SD from the P100 figures merely shows how much this permission has improved the availability of summits in the Association.

Brian

Thanks, Mike. Very enlightening. I didn’t know about that forum before!

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

Hello Walt, yes there quite a few forums about, the Facebook SOTA Free Expression web site and lots of blog sites most recently there have been some very interesting blogs from YO stations (Eg: http://yo9irf.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/sota-activation-yoec-480-and-yoec-312.html?spref=fband ) and of course the NA and VK sites. I think this was a great achievement : YO6PIB: 100 SOTA activation As regards the current thread I have read the post from Brian ADD. This bit struck me:

“10) There is no debate on this issue. SOTA is an awards scheme
administered by a small team of volunteers; SOTA is not a club,
participants are not members and the decision whether or not to take
part in this award scheme is solely the choice of the individual. The
various facilities provided free of any charge at the point of use –
SOTAwatch, the SOTA database, the reflector – are funded by the sale of
awards and merchandise otherwise there is no cost to any radio amateur
to take place in this scheme but it has to be recognised that the
ultimate decision as to what qualifies for this award scheme lies with
the SOTA Management Team.”

The concept of SOTA was a great creation which I support and also have donated money to the cause in the past. The notion of “rules are rules” and no debate upsets me but then I was recently emailed from a MT member to tell me that SOTA management is not " a democracy". My guess about the statement is a wish to close the debate down as a alternative to “this thread is now closed” option which has been used in the past.

So be it - now off with Bertie the greyhound for a walk and hopefully catch Phil/Nick on their next activation in PA land :sunglasses:

Cheers
Mike

Does this apply to the region identifiers that do not conform to rule 3.4 ?

(ducks for cover…)

Martyn

For that I am afraid, I plead guilty.
Jim

Out of context quote Mike.

There is no debate on P150. It is and will be the standard for all associations except where SD allows P100.

3 Likes

So That means that G/SE can have P 100 - great!
When does it start?
Barry

1 Like

Yes, I told you that SOTA is not a democracy, but then, you already know that - when did you last get a voting paper? :smile:

The simple fact is that SOTA is owned and the MT are entrusted with managing the concept, not changing it to suit whatever pressure group might be currently making a noise. As for “no debate”, what do you think this is, Scotch Mist? Despite the myth of the inimical MT fostered in another place, the only limits on debate here are set by the AUP (Acceptable Use Policy) which is designed to prevent bad language, slanging matches, ad hominem attacks and limit the irrepressible keyboard warriers that infest so many sites. As you have proved here, debate is open and free, freer in fact than another site that I am not supposed to “be a fan of”! The “no debate” that you are upset by is simply that SOTA is what its rules set it out to be, you are not prevented from having or expressing opinions but SOTA is what it is and will not be changed by people trying to bend its basis to get more summits and have an easier time amassing points. SOTA isn’t supposed to be easy, SOTA is supposed to be challenging.

Brian

2 Likes

No, it doesn’t Barry. However, the HEMA, GMA and WAB Trigpointing schemes all cater for such sites should you wish to do some portable activity from them (and work towards an award).

It starts when G/SE becomes a separate Association.

Brian

I am one of the few activators who already has an award for activating trigs - however, I still think the situation is wrong.
F/NO is P 100 and that is just over 20 miles from my home - the very same topography and geology.
The MT is very wrong to be so dictatorial on this - the opinions of the activators and chaser should be listened to and, most importantly - acted upon.
The MT is free to give it’s opinion - even when it is WRONG.
Barry

2 Likes

No, Barry. The Activators and Chasers (also SWLs) are not members of an organisation, they are not shareholders, they are not customers, they are participants. SOTA offers a product, you are at liberty to use or not use that product as you wish, a product that you don’t even have to pay for unless you also want a sheepskin, that does not give you a say in that product. Do you think you have a say in how the DXCC entities are added or not added to their list? You chase and work the entities that they say you can work, end of.

Arguing about what happens in another Association the other side of the English Channel ignores that however similar the topography and geology may be, it is another Association in another country. Yes, the MT set parameters that permit and control subdivision of the larger Associations into P100 and P150 provinces, those parameters are limited by size and % area simply to prevent smaller Associations splitting off pocket handkerchief patches as P100 sub units just so that locals can gain more easy points without having to spend money on travel. As I told Mike, SOTA isn’t supposed to be easy, it is supposed to be challenging.

Brian

Not a good idea to cite DXCC as an example given the wide ranging open consultation and approval process for DXCC plus remaining as a DXCC. The process is democratic and no need for voting papers. The assumption you may have is that people are simply interested in points, points are a factor but at then end of the day if someone has walked/climbed up some hill, mountain etc. it is good fun to try and work them. It tests your station which is a good thing. It would seem that the current challenge is to be fair…

Now where are Nick/Phil in PA land…

Mike

Hello Brian
I do not want Sota to be easy - after all I am a highly qualified Mountaineer.
My point was that P100 in the lowlands make perfect sense.
I do not in any way understand the reluctance to listen to and act upon the views of the people who make Sota what it is - not the MT - but the activators and chasers.
This debate will never go away - so listen to the people.
Barry

3 Likes