In reply to G4OIG:
I was thinking that maybe some kind of event was in order for when the new one is added to ceremonially add it to the list of summits.
Andy
MM0FMF
In reply to M1EYP:
Difficult to argue with that Gerald. But I’ve found a way!
I wondered who would bite. 
Of course it will be down to who logs the first contact at 00:01z… or should that be 00:00z? Memories of Cracoe Fell and the dire weather during that night of the changeover come flooding back (pun intended). Bagging the last two activations of Thorpe Fell Top NP-025 was enough for Paul G4MD and me - we bailed out (more or less quite literally) on trying to be the first ones to bag Cracoe.
73, Gerald G4OIG
Edit: 00:00z starts the SOTA day.
In reply to M1EYP:
It’s YAIPPAS! (Yet another intersting philiosophical point about SOTA)
If I was starting out now on the web pages I wouldn’t have a “first activated by” section. That’s simply for the reason that there can only be 1 first activator and like virginity, once it’s gone it’s good for good. If you weren’t born or licensed when SOTA started in England then you have few chances to get a 1st activated as all the summits have been done. You’re limited to changes and additions which means you’re up against all the others. For new associations it’s better.
So whilst I have a number of such firsts to my name, I’d drop it if I could. It also was the source of far too much development work to make it accurate!
I’d replace it with a desirability index based on how many times it’s been activated and how many unique chasers have worked it and how many chasers are active. A frequently activated hill with a diverse and wide number of chasers is less desirable than an infrequently activated hill with a small number of chasers. If I were to travel somewhere and there were several hills in the frame for my activations, I’d pick the summits with the high desirability number all other factors being equal. But that’s really only of use for places where all the summits have a few activations recorded against them.
For many parts of the world, the desirability value of the majority of summits tends to infinity as most of the summits have still to be activated.
Andy
MM0FMF
In reply to MM0FMF:
Hmmm, some very interesting thoughts Andy. Removing the “first activated” tag would not remove the desirability of bagging virgin summits as the suggested infinity desirability value would indicate those summits that are yet to be activated. Also the summit history shows the first activator, so the event would still be recorded.
Complex though it may be, I like the idea of each summit having a desirability value. Having just activated Cauldcleuch Head GM/SS-106 and Greatmoor Hill GM/SS-114, the combination of a small number of previous activations combined with a small number of previous QSOs would certainly have placed those summits well up the rankings.
Setting any politics aside, is your suggestion easily achieveable in practice? If so, I wonder what others think about this.
73, Gerald G4OIG
I think it will be very difficult to get away from what we have always had. The “first activator” thing has become part of the culture of SOTA, and always will be whether it is displayed on websites or not. The desirability factor probably doesn’t need defining or displaying - an overview of the available makes it clear enough anyway, and should you do a “desirable” summit, the desirability is reflected in the size of the pile-up. I am thinking of my activation of Tievecrom GI/CA-005 a few years ago!
In the original SOTA homelands of G and GW, it has long been impossible to snag a “first activator” title. Nonetheless, looking back at who it was is a very nice part of SOTA history, especially when we see the callsigns of our friend Shirley MW3GTE / MW0YLS. I, for one, would rather keep that history on our summit pages.
So a desirability value for each summit is not desirable to me. Is it achievable in practice? Yes, I am sure it is. Despite Andy’s modesty when taking over the portfolio from Gary G0HJQ, he turns out to be an excellent programmer who can make the Database do whatever we want it to do. However, you should see what is already on his work list. It’s a long list, and all stuff that would be way higher priority than this sort of thing IMHO.
Tom M1EYP
In reply to G4OIG:
is your suggestion easily achieveable in practice
It’s easy to prototype and display on the database website as I have total control. If you want it displaying on SOTAwatch then it needs work by Jon and that is down to his schedules etc.
The raw figures are (including GM’s most activated)
SS-064 Tinto, 287 unique chasers, 87 activations
SS-106 Caldcleuch Head, 24 unique chasers, 4 activations
SS-114 Greatmoor Hill, 25 unique chasers, 3 activations
I don’t have a desirability alogrithm yet
Andy
MM0FMF
In reply to MM0FMF:
I don’t have a desirability alogrithm yet
I expect there might be band and mode considerations, too? By way of a contrast, what’re the numbers for, say (picking a few oft-mentioned names out of the air), The Cloud, Gun and Shining Tor?
73, Rick M0LEP
In reply to MM0FMF:
SS-106 Caldcleuch Head, 24 unique chasers, 4 activations
SS-114 Greatmoor Hill, 25 unique chasers, 3 activations
You appear to have Cauldcleuch and Greatmoor the wrong way around, or at least partly. Only Jack, Paul and myself have activated Cauldcleuch, whereas Ken GM4DKH also activated Greatmoor in April this year.
Before we activated Cauldcleuch and Greatmoor, the figures were -
SS-106 Cauldcleuch Head, 11 unique chasers, 1 activation
SS-114 Greatmoor Hill, 8 unique chasers, 2 activations
Naturally conditions play a large part of the situation with regards to unique chasers. I must admit to being somewhat disappointed in not having a pile up on either summit, but it has been relatively dire on HF of late. Business was certainly more brisk on Larriston Fell the day after despite it having received considerably more activations.
73, Gerald G4OIG
In reply to G8ADD:
Lovely Brian.
The stress is on the e in the Welsh word instead of the o.
I expect Barry will be camped out waiting for validity to commence ;¬D
73
Dei M0YDH
In reply to M0YDH:
Lovely Brian.
The stress is on the e in the Welsh word instead of the o.
Oh I knew that, Dei, I was banking on the sysneg not knowing it!
73
Brian GV8ADD