Just a quick note to say that the MT is also in discussion regarding the issues current on the reflector and acknowledge that there have been some important points raised.
Please bear with us since we are not at full complement at the moment and we also need to consult outwith the team and so it might be a while before we can give any indications.
We will be watching the ongoing debates and also acknowledge the number of private emails we have received on the matter so please don’t interpret silence from us as lack of interest. As stated before, it is often not realistic for us to effectively engage in threads like this in real time!
I’m going to post here on your thread as my points run across the different debates now ongoing in various related threads.
My points are as follows:
SOTA has clearly become a highly successful and actively followed awards program. Part of this success is manifested in the growth of activity in other countries with other Associations becoming established.
Now we find ourselves in the situation where we have threads running on the following topics:
Do we need more G summits?
Why are there so many DM summits?
Why aren’t there more G 10 pointers?
…and other related topics about the “General Rules” etc.
It seems that because the program is successful, and has highly motivated participants, some of the anomalies between Associations have led to calls for changes or for rules to be amended etc. These anomalies would seem to be at the root of much of the discussion.
Well, maybe there does need to be some rather robust housekeeping applied (which may be difficult and will not please everyone on either side of the fence). This is especially important if the program is to become more global.
However, whatever happens, I would ask that the MT do not make any knee-jerk decisions in the face of intense lobbying. They should instead reflect, at some length, on some very good points being made and then act decisively (and rigorously where necessary) and with complete transparency in how and/or why decisions and changes have or have not been made.
Whatever happens, I would assume that a fairly extensive process of consultation with the regional Association managers will also be necessary to build a consensus as to how to move forward.
We have some interesting debate going on here but I would prefer that any reaction for or against change is based on a long term view for the good of SOTA as a whole.
many thanks for your post, your comments are very much appreciated. I am confident the MT will give the points raised due consideration and like Marc I look forward to a considered response. I hope also for transparency with each issue and as much consultation as possible is offered to us.
I understand they are difficult issues, but it would have been a lot easier to resolve the DM issue if the MT has acted when I first raised it in a private email to John G3WGV when the DL association came on line.
Over the last week or two we have been in the process of pulling together a discussion amongst the Association Managers world-wide to address the issue of consistency across associations, especially concerning prominence.
It is likely to be some time before we are able to report on any progress. Thanks for bearing with us on this.
Thanks for the update, it is surely appreciated by all that matters of such global (literally) consequence will require a considerable amount of discussion and liaison, and that this will take time. Better to “get it right” now than have the same problems again in a year or two’s time.
We look forward to the results of the world-wide deliberations.
Can I say that I fully agree with Paul G4MD, it is important to get it right at this point: with the seemingly inexorable spread of SOTA it is only a matter of time before the Americans and Japanese are aboard and then it will be much more difficult to tweak things!
Take your time, and don’t allow yourselves to be badgered.
Check your e-mails. You should have received one, or even two, invitations to join the new Reflector. If you still haven’t got it, e-mail Tom M1EYP direct and he’ll sort it out.
You’ve actually had four emails Andy, some repeated, but overall covering every different email address I could find for you - AM contact on sota.org.uk, Yahoogroup, QRZ.com etc
A few other AMs haven’t responded yet either - check your email folks!
You’ve actually had four emails Andy, some repeated, but overall
covering every different email address I could find for you - AM
contact on sota.org.uk, Yahoogroup, QRZ.com etc
A few other AMs haven’t responded yet either - check your email folks!
Tom M1EYP
Nope, nothing, nada.
Would you like to try a test to mm0fmf AT hotmail.com ?
I put on notice all those who cannot seem to abide by the advice that all posts to this forum should be ‘appropriate, constructive, friendly’, etc.
I have turned a blind eye to much of the offensive MT baiting and bullying of other contributors that has taken place in the past but am convinced that it is now damaging to the otherwise friendly atomosphere of the SOTA community.
People who resort to the sort of caustic, sarcastic remarks that are above in this thread (NOW REMOVED) are simply not welcome here.
Posting of this kind, whether directed to the MT or any individual, will result in a warning which if disregarded will ensure removal of their account from SOTAwatch and possibly also exclusion from the programme.
Robust debate we welcome and encourage, but nastiness just stifles debate and discourages people from posting their views as witnessed by the steady stream of emails the MT receive from people who are reluctant to post their views on the reflector for this exact reason.
This now changes. If your post isn’t constructive and friendly or is obviously offensive, it will be removed. And if you persist, so will you.
In reply to GM4ZFZ:
I had to remove my post from the debate when I pointed out I thought these public discussions were damaging to SOTA and amateur radio. I was also told the post was offensive, I will certainly think twice before I ever join in again.
Mike G0HIO
Thanks for the warning Jon.
I have views on the subjects under discussion but have also avoided giving any input due to the unpleasant and personal nature of some of the posts/replies.
One of the main things I like about SOTA is the friendliness and camaradarie. It is sad to see it being eroded. I hope it stops!
Cheers
Q GW3BV
Hear, hear… I too wish the reflector to be a place where interesting, positive and friendly discussion will continue to take place. If that means moderation is required… I support it
As I’ve said before, this website/reflector is an outstanding piece of work that I know, from my own work experience in B2B marketing, is worth an arm and a leg from each person that uses it! …and anyone who thinks I’m joking… just toddle off to your nearest friendly web developer and give them a brief along the lines of all the features of this site (and the database too) and see what they ask you for… in terms of time and money to build it and support it. You will be more than surprised.
So c’mon everyone, let’s use this wonderful site to augment a fun, engaging and thoroughly absorbing facet of our hobby… and avoid the thinly veiled digs at some individuals who work hard with nothing in return… other my gratitude and that of any anyone else who truly enjoys SOTA for what it is today.
One should of course continue to post proposals and debate then. But please can all those that have been too intimidated to participate (as witnessed in Jon’s post) join in with further positive discussion.
It will have been no surprise to many that 2E0HJD has been warned privately now twice by email. He has chosen to take this public [HIS POSTS NOW REMOVED FROM THIS REFLECTOR AT HIS REQUEST].
I have now removed his user from SOTAwatch. If he seeks to rejoin without giving me assurance of his intention to be a positive contributor we may have to consider removing him from the SOTA database and the programme in general.
It’s a sad day. I really thought the simple guidance given about posts would have been sufficient without enforcement.
Jon whether I agree or disagree with 2E0HJD is irrelevant. I can’t see what was offensive in Mick’s post and I am posting this response for the benefit of sota.
This is a very sad day for sota when a man has to be silenced in this fashion by an unofficial MT action against free speech.
Please, please reconsider reversing your personal decision to remove Mick’s Reflector account before it’s too late. Your actions may prove be very damaging to an already under fire MT.
