We are spoilt. The IT support for SOTA is exceptional. I think that people sometimes forget that as users we are participating in someone else’s award scheme, with no charges, and very few restrictions or responsibilities.
With so many users there is an almost limitless potential for requests for new feature and enhancements.
Andrew, @VK3ARR, your approach of focusing on one system at a time has worked well. I think that your proposal to add a cumulative completes feature would be of interest to many users, but is not something to rush through. Thank you for being so responsive to the many requests and suggestions that you have received.
So I think, at some stage someone, maybe you Andy @MM0FMF, looked at the available data and thought, it might be nice to show an honours lists for completes where a user has recorded an activation AND a chase of a summit. The next logical step would have been to provide a honours list of completes where a user has recorded an activation AND a chase of a summit in a specific year.
Now that we have that honours list, Tim is asking for something new.
What I think is being requested is:
Create a recordset of the activators, summits and first date of activation of the summit for that activator.
Create a recordset of the chasers, summits and first date of chasing the summit for that chaser.
Create a recordset of the activators, summits, first activated date, first chased date, and the completion date (the latest of these 2 dates).
This is a very different proposition and potentially very resource intensive.
I repeatedly encounter similar problems when I provide a report to a client and they then get excited and want something completely different.
Maybe the definition of the current honours list for completes by year is not clear to the user, but it is a long established honours list.
I don’t think that Tim, @G5OLD, was, or is implying any criticism. Rather he was seeking clarification on the calculations having made a reasonable, but incorrect assumption of what the honours list was presenting.
It seems that Andrew, @VK3ARR, already has the new honours list on his list of features that might be nice to add.
All we have to do now is wait patiently and in the fullness of time, our wishes will most likely come true.
…so, in order to determine the Completes for a particular year you have to look at the relevant data from all the years before the year in question as well.
Seems to me the pragmatic solution is to remove the date filter on Completes and only allow a complete Completes search…
Tim, @G5OLD, would be guaranteed to beat Rod, @M0JLA. The activators who have earned the most completes in previous years would have the least opportunity to compete.
Having thought more deeply, the existing honours roll is the only sensible methodology, giving every activator an equal chance each year.
If you want to make it competitive, then"both chase and activate within a specific year" could be a challenge with a relatively level start point, but it’d only make sense for something like a year-long challenge.
TBH, I thought the point of Completes was to give folks another metric with which to challenge themselves, like Sloth and Goat, but perhaps a mite harder, and in that context only the all-time score matters.
If you take the list of summits you have activated in 2025 and the list of summits you have chased in 2025 you will find that they have 6 summits in common. They are:
As the database experts have said, it computes what your completes would be if your only contacts were the ones that match the filter.
Whether it was a deliberate design decision or just fell out that way is an interesting question. Personally I suspect the latter, having imagined the likely SQL lying behind it.
is to remove the date filter on Completes and only allow a complete Completes search…