Threads like this makes me think some people have too much time on their hands.
4 Likes
“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time” - John Lydgate
It was good satyre - it prophetically satyrised just about everything thats been suggested since.
4 Likes
Also Bob Dylan in World War Three Blues.
1 Like
This is great, looking forward to implementation.
Just don’t adopt the scoring system of Origami On the Air (OOTA)
I’ve heard it just folded.
I’ll get me coat
8 Likes
Catching up with this thread has given me some ideas about how some of the suggestions could be realistically implemented.
The ‘vote’ idea for creating a difficulty scaling factor or bonus is flawed due to the inevitable lag between the activation(s), the vote submission, the calculation and the implementation. Limits to these time lapses would need to be defined and would introduce a whole new layer of reflector debate.
So what we would need is a dynamic system that takes account of the data already in the system to constantly update the points value of each summit in a live manner.
Therefore I ask myself, what data in the system best identifies the actual challenge and difficulty of each summit? We haven’t got hike length, actual ascents required, remoteness from civilisation or technical difficulty data. However, we do have the number of activations already submitted for each reference. I think it would be reasonable to assume a negative correlation between the number of activations and the difficulty/challenge of a summit. It wouldn’t be perfect but it is a parameter that is readily available, already in the system and easy to understand.
I propose the following dynamic weighted activation points system:
Let p be the basic initial points for the summit from the original six scoring bands (1-2-4-6-8-10).
Let n be the number of activations recorded for that summit, in the database at the time of submission.
Let a be the age in years of the activator on the date of the activation.
Live dynamic points = p x log n^a / (a x log n)
This is of course for n>=1. First activations of any summit will be scored simply using the ARM points bands.
I’ve run the data from the first 23 years of SOTA through this formula (some activator D.O.B.s needed to be estimated due to lack of detail on QRZ pages) and the results look entirely sensible to me.
I hope we can all unite and get behind this viable solution.
7 Likes
Let’s just make it easy for everyone. As ruler of the breakaway Republic of GM/ES, I announce diktat #87.
All hills (mountains) are created equal, however some Activators are more equal than others.
From 1st September 2025, all hills (mountains) = 1 point, except if the temperature exceeds 40°C or drops below -40°C (that’s 120 bananas for my 
friends).
As elected Ruler of the Republic GM/ES, I claim 20 points per summit, from a starting point of 20,000 points.
End of message
3 Likes
Some summits don’t want to be activated. They are dangerous. Putting a bounty on that summit might not be a smart thing to do. Instead, I would hear the area managers and local hams to include some other non-referenced summits even if they do not fulfill the prominence requirement.
Again, I think that looking for a global ranking system will lead nowhere. Points mean nothing.
2 Likes
Perhaps those people who are unhappy with SOTA would like to get together and set up a new grouping with new rules and make it work for them. If it worked well then SOTA might be redundant. I look forward to trying out the new system - if I live long enough 
73,
Rod
8 Likes
In the breakaway Republic of G/LD we have had such a scheme since 2007 called Wainwrights On The Air (WOTA). There are 303 qualifying summits all packed within the 2,362 km² area of the Lake District National Park. The criterium for a summit to be included was not based on topology but on the whim of one man, Alfred Wainwright, who wrote a series of books on those hills & mountains now known as the Wainwrights.
All summits are worth 1 point (per year), no winter bonus. An activator needs only one QSO to qualify the summit activation. About 50 Wainwrights also happen to be SOTAs. There are some lovely non-SOTA WOTAs, e.g. Scafell Pike (boring!) is a SOTA (G/LD-001), next door Scafell (nicer!) is not a SOTA.
3 Likes
Just like Sir Hugh Munro and his popular list of hills, the name of which I can’t put my finger on at the moment…
2 Likes
It’s still an objective list. There is no way to modify the list of summits, they are either in Wainwright’s books or not. Summits not in the books are not in the scheme. But the best part of WOTA is that it exists because Julian G4ILO (sk) created it himself when he found out SOTA was based on a set of rules he didn’t like. He complained some of his favourite hills where not in SOTA, found out why, complained and was told “if you don’t like how SOTA works you can always make up your own award scheme”. And he did. His award scheme/program fits the locale and the Wainwright summits just nicely. To this day, he’s the only person I can think of that when told “well go and make up your own scheme” who has done just that. It’s a good idea, well thought out that happily works as a stand-alone scheme and also fits nicely with people doing SOTA as well. The two awards are not mutually exclusive or in competition with each other. There are many people who have done WOTA activations whilst on their way to and from SOTA summits.
4 Likes
Many of us who enjoy both schemes have found that combination can make a very satisfying day’s walk in the Lakes.
1 Like
The problem with the concept of “difficulty” is that it is not a constant. It varies with the conditions including the condition of the activator and even with the time of year, and with the route chosen. In fact a simple one-point summit can be difficult to the point of being impossible if it is privately owned and permission will not be granted. A summit guarded by extensive bogs will become much easier in a drought and much harder if under a metre of powder snow. A nice easy route like the PyG track on Snowdon GW/NW-001 becomes very trying when covered in black ice (verglas) and some of the long GM routes may need careful consideration in mid winter with just six hours of full daylight. An opinion about the difficulty of a summit will reflect the conditions at the time of ascent and may only gain validity after many ascents in variable conditions. I think that factoring in difficulty is a dead end.
2 Likes
I think you maybe onto something with this.
However, I was about to alert and arrange my trip to GM/SI-204, but under this point system I think I’ll stick to Billinge.
4 Likes
I think that is a great solution and should be reasonably easy to implement. It may be best to refactor the formula to maintain database efficiency, but I think that this is probably best discussed with the DBAs privately.
Kevin
1 Like
I can’t decide if first activators of a summit are going to like the results or not.
2 Likes
I am not sure if I have worked this out correctly but by my calculations this makes G/SP-015 an invalid summit! 
2 Likes
If n=0 the expression is undefined so therefore first activators of a summit get to choose how many points they get. Similarly, all babies under 1 get to choose their score.
1 Like