During the most recent trials and tribulations much has been said and commented on. That is now history.
However there does not appear to have been any mention of the great job of work that the SOTA Management Team undertake on behalf of all SOTA participants. Therefore may I now, without equivocation or reservation of any kind, express my thanks and heartfelt gratitude to each member of the MT, past and present, who receive so much flak yet remain so diginified.
Once again THANK YOU
In reply to G6DDQ:
Myke
I suspect that they will have had many e-mails of support directly. I don’t think that there is much doubt that the vast majority of participants appreciate that SOTA does not just “happen” but requires continual work from the MT behind the scenes to keep it running. Unfortunately events such as the recent one, take up huge amounts of additional time and inevitably sap enthusiasm (talking from experience). That is a great pity as SOTA suffers in the long term.
Like you I am happy to put on record my thanks to the MT; particularly to those who have suffered extraordinary and uncalled-for personal attacks. I believe that those who are “no longer with us” have done huge damage to SOTA over a prolonged period and will not be mourning their disappearance here.
73
Richard
G3CWI
In reply to G6MZX:
I couldn’t agree less looking at how some MT members acted during recent P100 adjustements in DL.
I am personally much more impressed by constantly highly active chasers/activators such as Roy, G4SSH and Mike, GW0DSP - very difficult to miss them on any CW activation!
I also believe “those no with us anymore” refers to a ban of some on the reflector and not to a ban of these hams to the program - because that would be a real loss to SOTA.
Gerd.
In reply to G6DDQ:
I think that unfortunately the German implementation of SOTA was flawed from the beginning. It may well have been a misinterpretation possibly through language but SOTA was never designed to be so many peaks regardless of prominence. So the early German implementation was simply not SOTA.
Of course it is hard for those who have been presented with a programme to find it removed and replaced with fewer qualifying summits. But realistically could all those summits with such limited prominence really be called SOTA given the definition at inception.
I think that in accepting P100 for Germany, the MT was magnanimous. Equally going with P100 for the flatlands of ON & PA was a sensible recognition of their geomorphology.
So I believe that we have an MT that has demonstrated a sound and logical approach to the evolution of SOTA and I align myself with those above who appreciate the contribution of the MT.
73 jim
I have activated ON-022 (Hotondberg) last monday and I’m not really convinced this is a hill that should be in SOTA. It blends in really nice with the surrounding landscape and has IMHO not the required prominence.
On the other hand ON-008 (Kemmelberg) has been removed because of not meeting the requirments of SOTA due to the “proximity” of a french SOTA. I would not like to walk from Kemmelberg to the french Catsberg. I’m pretty sure I would get blisters.
Peter
In reply to ON3WAB:
Interesting issue. If every country has an independent Association Manager and looks after its own country programme, why should the position of a summit in another country have any bearing. If you were setting up any Amateur Radio scheme for Belgium, you’d concern yourself with Belgium. OK so SOTA is designed to be an international programme but supposed to be deployable at the country level.
Nice to work you from SB-006 last weekend.
73 jim
It was a new one for me Jim, Thank you.
I also logged you on 60m with a 55.
73
Peter
In reply to ON3WAB:
Hi Peter
You raise a couple of interesting points…
Regarding your question about Hontonberg, Johan (the ON AM) and I have checked this very carefully. The summit is part of a huge undulating “plateau” with a number of highest spots within a few meters vertically of the highest elevation.
Hotonberg is the highest spot but the next highest spot is a meter or less lower. This is checked on the national survey data as well as SRTM data. So although it does not look like it, Hotonberg does have prominence but as part of a large flatter area. This is not unlike summits like Detling Hill in the UK.
As for Kemmelberg, unfortunately topographic prominence does not respect political boundaries… the former is fixed but the latter can of course move 
This rule is applied to all associations and for example there are DL summits that are parented by OE summits and PA summits that are parented by DM summits. In this instance Kemmelberg is parented by Mont des Cats in France. With flatter regions, it is quite possible that a parent summit that negates another could be a very long way away.
I hope this explains and is useful to those that have an interest. If you have any further information to add to the discussion above, I’m sure Johan would be pleased to see it.
73 Marc G0AZS
SOTA Summits Manager
Hi Marc,
Thanks for the explanation.
I tend not to agree with you concerning Hotond as there are a few other summits in the same plateau, like Scherpenberg ( only yards away) , Kwaremont and Kluisberg. But I respect the rules and will leave it to that.
73
Peter
In reply to ON3WAB:
Hi Peter
Thanks for your understanding…
Yes I agree there do seem to be a number of high spots on this large plateau all with a very similar elevation. According to the data reviewed (National Survey etc) Hotondberg is the highest point is is therefore the parent of a very large P100 summit area. However if you have some additional data to suggest one of the others is higher (even by a meter) please make Johan (ON AM) aware of it. Thanks…
73 Marc G0AZS