FWIW, I partly agree with @ea2if but not fully. I partly agree with @g4oig but not fully. I partly agree with @m0hgy but not fully.
For me, this is nothing to do with the chaser (caller) behaviour, so appealing to them for protocol change is pointless. Like with all other aspects, the only worthwhile practical solution lies with the operating style of the activator.
/P is not exclusive to SOTA, so if asking for “only /P” you must accept you may very well still attract non-SOTA stations. The activator could call “PSE ONLY SOTA” but that may work out to be less efficient then “/P ?” and working all the portables regardless of status.
I am very, very disapointed with the tone of this topic.
Ham radio is all about good will, be nice to everybody, enjoy every qso. Now I am reading no, I dont want you. You cheated me. We are closed and specialized group. Activators and chasers only. Dont mess with us. I hate FF and all other ham radio operators.
This Is a little off topic, but the /P is involved.
It would be nice if the Europe SOTA Stations would drop the /P during CW s2s contacts with North America.
I have lost a few contacts due to its use, especially when signals are weak. I don’t think im the only one seeing this problem.
For example if i hear a weak station calling me and he is in GM but using his home call…like GM/G5ABC/P.
On my end I weakly hear some letters and multiple / characters. I end up thinking I have at least two or three stations calling me, one from GM, one from G5, and one from P .
I think the problem here is that each operator has their own perspective. Anyone who has climbed a hill or even made the effort to set up a portable station wants and deserves to make contacts. Often I am called by parks operators and they want to fill their log too. if they are looking for the WWFF award for activating they want 44 contacts, not just 4.
If a station calls trying to break a pileup using /p/p/p then they are just trying to break a pileup, they aren’t trying to cheat anyone. The sota portable may be disappointed when they realise it’s not an S2S, but then, they are also disappointed it is not a VK0 or other rare dx callsign. They all go into the log and the points are a different part of the expedition.
Here I am sometimes just glad to get 4 contacts especially in poor conditions. If they are an S2S that is icing on the cake, but otherwise if I get my activation points that is good enough reward.
So my feeling is that I feel your pain, Guru, but I don’t resent the /p caller who is not a sota activator, I am still glad to have the contact in my log. And of course that other caller is a very nice operator, a lady or gentleman and I know if you met them in the radio club you’d welcome them just as much as any other operator.
Hi Damir,
I really think that there’s some “lost in translation” problems in Guru’s first post. “Cheated” is a very emotive word.
In any case when you come across a thread that either you don’t like or simply doesn’t interest you, rather than leaving the reflector, there’s another option. At the bottom of the thread,there’s a box that says either “Tracking” or “normal” - which you can change to “Muted” and then you wont see that thread or any updates to it any more in the reflector:
I have met Guru @EA2IF personally and I can assure you: He has ham spirit!
But I can also understand him a little… and I think the emotional choice of words was made under the fresh impression of having experienced it several times.
Maybe annoyed or just disappointed would be a better word… and probably he would express it that way today.
I think that as SOTA operators, we need to be open minded towards other awards programs. I wonder how many SOTA activators also upload their logs to GMA. Certainly, GMA allows SOTA summits to count in their program. A GMA operator will allways be happy to receive a S2S call from a SOTA activator, should we not also be friendly and open minded? To say that ‘we feel cheated’ when the S2S turns out to be GMA smacks of snobbery.
For my part, I would only ask a small courtesy: that GMA activators add GMA REF to their info, so that I know not to bother entering the ref in my log; but they are always most welcome in my log!
Are we really in such a hurry that we don’t have time for GMA? If I had to make one complaint as an activator (something I try to avoid, since it won’t change anything) it would be about chasers sending over the top of me and then dissapearing without even bothering about the RST. They cannot possibly know what it is, because they were sending TU 73 as I was sending it. So no QSO basically. If you were expecting to be in my log but were not, then this is probably what happened.
73 de OE6FEG
Matt
I agree that radio should be inclusive. That means every kind of /P station whether SOTA or not, and indeed whether SSB, FM, CW or FT8.
This is a lively and active discussion forum, and similarly inclusive to all opinions. There’s no need to cancel your involvement in SOTA because you disagree with the personal opinion of just one of many thousands of activators.
I disagree with Guru on this matter. But Guru is still a good friend of mine. If I cancelled all my friendships where fundamental disagreements existed, I would have zero friends!
The frustration of not gaining S2S (SOTA2SOTA) points, should not obscure the purpose of the SOTA program. No Activator Exists Without Chaser !! Unless we somehow want to have only 4! QSOs in the log.
I think you missread or missinterpreted my comments. Have you read all my posts in this thread? Where do I say I don’t want a QSO with a specific ham operator? What the subject is about is the priority of the /P over the rest in the pile up, which is legitimate, in my opinion, for a SOTA to SOTA contact, but not otherwise. The QSO is always welcome but not with priority over the rest of chasers in the pileup if they are not activating SOTA.
If I’m activating SOTA and a /P breaks through the pileup, why should he send me his HEMA, GMA, COTA and WFF references during our QSO if I didn’t ask for them and I’m activating SOTA with a pile of SOTA chasers waiting in the queue?
Please, don’t leave the Reflector because you don’t like what it’s said in a specific thread. As Ed pointed, you can just mute it and forget about it.
If a /p station does not end their call /p, they are violating their license conditions. How then, should they answer in a way that does not give them an undue advantage (in your opinion).
Matt
Hi Matt,
If a ham is signing with /P but not activating SOTA and he successfully breaks the pileup, that’s perfect, hats off to him, but I’d expect a standard exchange in our QSO, not receiving several references from other programmes he is working on and activating but I’m not and I never requested.
Sometimes I’ve been chased by some hams signing /P, we had a standard QSO and when I asked for his SOTA reference, he responded NO SOTA. And that’s absolutely fine and perfect for me.
I completely disagree with the suggestion that /P should be linked solely to SOTA. I don’t actively participate in any other programmes such as HEMA, FF or even WOTA; but being a keen SOTAist I understand that others have their favoured programmes and I am happy to support them and work them. In fact I’m happy to work anyone. Of course I love getting SOTA S2S, because we have a shared understanding; but SOTA isn’t better or more important than any other radio activity.
However, I do confess to feeling that there is a world of difference between my version of /P (carrying everything on my back with leg power) and the licence definition - the vehicle based high power set ups with towers, beams, generators etc! /P? Really!
what would be life without emotions?
But we should not overestimate them.
It helps to understand the other side.
So what is the difference between SOTA and GMA?
in SOTA only SOTA to SOTA contacts are valid S2S contacts
in GMA all possible contacts between SOTA and GMA peeks are valid S2S contacts…
So from the others perspective GMA to SOTA is a valid S2S contact…
We often tend to rate situations whitout completely understanding them.
We often see it from our perspective… which is normal, we cannot know everything…
But lets be open and give everyone the chance for a (S2S) Qso even if it seem weird from our perspective… After all it is just a hobby that we all should enjoy.
Looking forward to many QSOs from whatever program…
There’s no bigotry to be had, in my case (I’m not a very active activator) I’m happy to do QSOs with all of my chasers when I’m on a summit.
Guru @EA2IF if you are a little curious take a look at the GoGreen XOTA program and you will be able to see since 2020 (start of the program) how many non Sota (GMA & WFF) you have contacted!
It is however very often SOTA activators which are on peaks with multiple references.
I don’t think this suggestion has ever been made in this thread, so there’s no point in discussing this here, as it would divert the subject.
Of course not and nobody ever suggested/insinuated such thing in this thread.
Indeed… but it’s the same if you compare a base station with a barefoot rig at 100W onto a dipole versus some other big gun’s station with AMP, big towers, several phased yagis, etc… That’s life, rich and fun in its variety.
Question: do a GMA activator need to give his GMA reference to the other party in the QSO for his contact to be valid?
In SOTA, sending the reference is not mandatory for a QSO to be valid, even during a S2S QSO. In fact I have started to not send it during a S2S QSO when I’m chased by a well known activator whom I know he is having my spot on SW3. Of course, I’ll always send my reference if requested.
