That’ll be P100 Walt! 
I seem to remember 2K was used by Ofcom for a short time as a prefix for CB callsigns!
Tee hee!
Perhaps Karl will be able to tell us how many qualifying summits there would be in Cornwall if the P100 rule was applied there?
73,
Walt
What Brian !?
I thought you had an interest in history? It teaches us that suppression and ignoring the view of people does not work in the long run. There are a lot of people who just cannot be bothered to get involved in making comments so best not to assume there are just “handful of vocal complainers” otherwise it will be Putinlike…
Time to do some house jobs I think
From cold but bright East Sussex.
Mike
2 Likes
Anyway - it looks like SOTA is designed as a P150 system and that’s how it’s going to stay.
Interesting point though Walt and should Cornwall break away then they might indeed have a P100 association.
Therefore it follows that the SOTA system doesn’t really have ANYTHING to do with how mountainous an area of the earth is because it’s based upon the coverage of whatever area is chosen (whether by SOTA or by the DXCC or whatever)
All interesting stuff…
(& I’d keep the CB thing to yourself Walt )
5 P150 summits in Cornwall, area of Cornwall 3563 km^2
SD = 3563 / 5 = 713
A P150 association 
1 Like
Ha ha Andy - that’s just ‘luck’ though… It could easily be somewhere that would get P100! 
My Last comment (for now).
Not one of the few Brian - but just one of the few prepared to speak up for the majority.
Most fear being banned from sota for life by the Dictatorship if they step out side the views of the MT.
Barry
4 Likes
Perhaps Brian can tell us how many have been so treated.
73,
Rod
That is a politicians comment Mike. What you are claiming is that anybody who doesn’t speak up against you is on your side! So tell me, Mike, where is this “suppression” that you are on about? Are you in the doghouse right now, or are you taking advantage of the free expression that exists here?
Brian
Reasonable question Rod.
-
1 person has been banned for good for repeated abusive behaviour and excluded from the program for good for cheating.
-
1 person has requested removal and since requested reinstatement which will be actioned when we have time.
-
1 person is suspended at his own request and has been caught cheating in contests and is suspected of cheating on SOTA. He will need to prove he is at the summit should he wish to activate in future.
-
1 person is temporarily suspended for posting pro-Nazi information.
-
1 person is required to prove he was actually at the summit for all activations.
Between 5-10 people are suspended and will be reinstated should they state they are prepared to follow the AUP. Of these one of them threatened to disrupt all our online services then requested reinstatement and when shown his threatening emails decided he was not prepaped to state he would follow the AUP.
I should also state 1 person was requested to provide proof he had visited summits and was able to prove definitively he had visited the summits when claimed and produced astounding amounts of proof of planning to enable many summits to be activated in a short time. He is was completely exonerated of any doubt.
Hi all,
as a ham activist and serious mountain climber (having been on the summits the different tops of Europe, unfortunatily without any rig), but living in Germany’s lowlands I’m somewhat angry about the p150 decision.
As far as the lowlands here are concerned, I would roughly estimate that around 50% of the summits are no longer valid, but don’t blame me if this number is not exactly correct, it’s just a guess. It makes me sad that, based on this decision
- people have to drive longer distances to reach a SOTA summit,
- some people without car might not reach summits in their neighborhood,
- older people might not be abled to reach all summits,
- few summits - some of them I know - with “bombastic” views are no longer valid.
Obviously this may lead to less activity and definitely not to a higher level of activity. I’m sure that this has negative effects on the QRP-society and the CW-activists.
In the German part of the Alps, which is one of my homes as far as mountaineering is concerned, the p150 regulation might delete some summits which are - relatively - easy and safely to reach. The above-noted is is also valid here but it has to be added, that we are talking of real danger in higher mountains. No one is forced to climb on difficult mountains, but increasing SOTA-activity looks different.
It is absolutely true that SOTA is not an association or a club. It is guided by a limited amount of very active OMs and I have to mention that I wish a higher number of activists would exist in any place of the Ham-world. But it has been said in on of today’s earlier postings here, that SOTA is some kind of an offer to customers (participants). I’m not a big friend of this business-like attitude, but if it is valid, than it should be clear that regulations bringing down the potential(!) number of participants are not a good choice.
Acc to my opinion the last statement remains valid also for the (true) case that in most other parts of the SOTA-world the p150 is valid (might it be useful to think about this?). Also the fact that only very few, but not only German OMs complain, is of no importance here, because I think that less than 1% of the activators and chasers will be active in this forum.
73 from the first days of spring here, Alexander, DL1AIW.
2 Likes
Actually your question is too vague, Rod. How many have been excluded for misbehaviour - Andy has answered that. How many have been excluded for disagreeing with the MT? None. I repeat that - NONE.
I know that you subscribe to the myth of the inimical MT, your words in another place that has less liberty than here proves that, so I doubt that you will believe me, but it is true.
Brian
Please see the response from the MT
Brian,
thank you. In this point I totally agree with you, although it’s not about complaining. At least from my point of view it isn’t. And these are very important questions.
On the other hand I also somehow agree with Mike’s latest post here. But I can’t overview what is the majority and what is the minority.
The only thing I can do is showing the MT facts you may not have considered because you’re probably not that familiar with DM. It’s not about chaniging SOTA into something different but about keeping the spirit of hiking and portable operation from interesting summits, as I tried to say in my first post.
And while writing this, there’ve come up so many new posts. Gentlemen, please keep the debate to the topic and calm down. There’s no reason to be upset. Don’t talk about dictatorship as we’ve been debating freely here. I’m sure nobody wants the topic to be closed just because people got rude.
Ahoi
Pom
4 Likes
Andy,
Thank you for taking my comment seriously and for the reassuring reply.
It seems to me that threat of banning has been overstated and that reasonable opinions moderately expressed are tolerated if neither encouraged nor acted upon.
With that in mind I offer my 2p worth into the discussion:-
The fact that there is provision for P100 inclusion if the P150 density falls below a certain arbitrary figure seems to be the cause of the current problem. Once this concession is made it becomes a “me too” issue. Thus IMHO the concession was a mistake from the start.
The fact that Germany already having a large P150 density acquired P100 concession appears to have been another, separate mistake.
The present situation involves dealing with one or both of these mistakes and, as is usual in such situations, the process is bound to cause some ill-feeling. So be it; because unless sorted out the issue will grumble on and flare up again from time to time.
(There are quite a few P100 within a one hour drive from here.)
73,
Rod
2 Likes
Brian,
I am intrigued and puzzled by this assertion; are you sure you have the correct identity here?
73,
Rod
No Brian,
No at all and I do not know why you you make the comment about “Are you in the doghouse right now,” Which I find rather rude and offensive, so perhaps moderate yourself please.
In very recent times this thread would have been killed but it has not been because I guess you know there is now a wider debate forum. You asked in the past why I am interested in Germany? I am interested in fairness and open forum.
I think the work that is done for SOTA by MT and many others doing research is great. Maintaining data is not an easy thing to do but it is one of the keys to the success of SOTA. For many people the SOTA idea has renewed interest in getting out and back into radio which is great. Again I repeat listen to those who speak and consider those who may agree but may be too frightened to say anything.
Mike
1 Like
And those who disagree and may be too frightened to say anything.
No Tom…
because it`s useless to say something…see the 10 points from G8ADD…
Good night SOTA in DM…
73 de Tom
DL1DVE
3 Likes
I’m not surprised that the difference between fact and rumour is actually enormous Rod. If you were to see background discussions on the few occasions we have discussed taking action you would see that one person always insists we follow the letter of our AUP. That person is Brian G8ADD. We have a policy that is applied objectively and that objective policy protects the speech that we may not personally like being put on here. The same cannot be said for some other discussion forums.
We have strived to have an objective set of rules since the start. We have not always been successful ourselves in applying them. When we have made concessions we have made a rod for our own backs later on.
It is, the MT have acknowledged that for a long time. The original MT were wrong to accept the initial proposals, the initial German AMs (there was no DM/DL in those days) were wrong to propose anything and everything as a summit. Resolving to P100 was a mistake but even then 3700 or so summits were removed which shows how completely invalid the initial association was. Since then, the availability of software to accurately analyse topography enables the issue to be fixed. OE was P100 IIRC and the AM’s proposed the change to P150 themselves. Again better software now allows us to see that there are, sadly, many summits which are not P150.
It is being sorted and I can understand there will be some confusion. For the record HB9 has been updated to full P150 compliance. There were approx. 40 summits in that association that were not P150 and 75 that were not included. The net gain was 35 ISTR. Though an important summit for an HB9 award was lost. The AM and team did an excellent job of sorting out duplicate border summits. Similarly EA2 is now fully compliant P150 and also removed duplicate border summits. The work for the OE and DM AM’s is a massive task. I’m sure many people have no idea how hard it is to put an association together. I’ve done one myself, it had 12 summits and took me many weeks. The W6 AM had a team of helpers and programmers involved when they added about 3600 summits a few years back.
We have forced the new world associations in the US and VK to be squeaky clean about shared borders and P150. We’ve been hard on all new associations to be accurate about prominence. This has no doubt put off people putting together new associations when they see what is involved. We need to ensure the summit info comes from reputable lists or includes col information otherwise we cannot be sure we are adding valid summits. I’m not too involved in the updates process, I simply make sure the database works, so I’m not up to speed on what else has been validated or is still be to validated in Europe. But the rules will be applied equally to all associations.
There’s nothing special about Germany from a SOTA perspective, it’s country with a flat bit and some hilly bits. (Actually there is something very special about Germany and German people because I’ve been there for a holiday 23 times in the last 25 years!) If it was applying to join now it would be treated the same as other new associations such as CU, EA6, YU and R9U. The new German association would start out with 370 (or whatever the final number is) summits and requests to have P100 would be dealt with the same as any other prospective association along with claiming duplicate border summits.
4 Likes