Brian was recalling the older German and French sections on the old reflector which are not currently available since we moved from homegrown software to using Discourse. Unfortunately, Brian’s PC is faulty at present and he is trying to do everything online via an iPad until his PC is fixed. That makes it hard to check back on what has happened in the past.
Well, maybe a SOTACOPTER will be born 
In any case, I would like to say that I appreciate the work of MT.
I became a bit addicted to SOTA. I need to occasionally run up after work and SOTA program is a wonderful opportunity.
But my radio can sometimes be dusty.
The problem is that the silent majority is not addicted to SOTA and that’s why it does not say anything out loud - thus forming the so-called mainstream whose opinion wins always and everywhere.
We must also become less dependent on the program, that is all, then it would be fine.
Karel
Hi Peter
I am not keeping any lists, I am not a counsellor, neither am I a therapist. I am not a member of the MT and have not been so for about a decade, so don’t email me about SOTA Management please!
73 Richard G3CWI
3 Likes
Hello Friends,
do you really need more Germans to write down their opinions?
You have got about 10 that wrote their opinions, and to me they are all saying about the same.
And I agree with all of them - I have the same opinions.
I can only repeat or write it with my words.
If I put myself into the MT and their goal - then I do understand. The goal is one rule and a worldwide programm, and history is history (i.e. ignore the history). In other words, if the P100 was kept (for the reasons given by DMs, DLs, HAs etc.) and then, for instance, JA (Japan) would like to join but they refuse because of this historically kept rule - then this would be considered as bad by the MT.
But the really bitter pill to swallow is the following
Germany joined as one of the first assiciations outside the UK as referenced before. The rules were agreed and written down:
- Wenn ein Gipfel nach (1) ein geeignetes Ziel ist, aber die Bedingung
(2) nicht erfüllt, kann er trotzdem in die Gipfelliste aufgenommen
werden. Die Entscheidung darüber trifft das Management Team. - free translation: if a summit does not meet P150, but is regarded a reasonable target, then it can be added to the list. Decision is made by the management team.
That was the rule and clear to everybody. Also to the MT! It is not an issue about map quality.
Okay, too many peaks were added then under the exception rule. That was called an error.
Errors can be made and need to be fixed.
So, error #1 was made and was fixed by a decision in 2008 based on the rules (P100).
But here comes the issue. You cannot simply make errors twice. That is another rule, also in private life and business. I think you cannot simply declare the decision of 2008 as an error again.
We already lost many acivators here in 2008 which did never come back.
From my point of view, keeping the decisions of around 2008 would be more like ham spirit.
Personally, I will not step out of SOTA completely. I will do it like DL4TO - activate about the same amount of mountains. But considerable less for SOTA, more for GMA. GMA is in place and works very well.
Lars
DL8WJM
5 Likes
I cannot find this quote in the German rules. I can find this at 3.5.1:
"Die Assoziation muss eine entsprechende Topologie haben, die es ermöglicht mannigfaltige Gipfel zu definieren. Das SOTA MT empfiehlt eine minimale Schartenhöhe (Prominenz) der Gipfel von 150 m. Die minimale Schartenhöhe einer Assoziation die durch das Programm akzeptiert wird liegt bei 100 m. Im Falle, dass diese Richtlinie nicht erfüllt wird, kann diese Entität oder Untergliederung der Entität nicht am SOTA-Programm teilnehmen. Potentielle Assoziationen, die eine chartenhöhe kleiner als 150 m für ihren Bereich verwenden wollen sollten eine stichhaltige Begründung für die Wahl ihres bevorzugten Wertes liefern können. Und sie sollten in der Lage sein zu zeigen, wie die niedrigere Schartenhöhe signifikant zur Lebensfähigkeit ihrer geplanten Assoziation beiträgt. "
“The association must hold an appropriate topology, which makes it possible to define diverse summit. The SOTA MT recommends a minimum saddle height (prominence) of the peak of 150 m. The minimum saddle height of an association which is accepted by the program is located at 100 m. In the event that this policy is not met, the entity or subdivision may not participate in the SOTA program of the entity. Potential associations that want to use a chart height less than 150 m in their area should be able to provide a sound rationale for the choice of their preferred value. And they should be able to show how the lower saddle height contributes significantly to the viability of their planned association.”
I haven’t checked to see if Lars quote comes from the DM ARM but the salient fact here is explained in 3.12.4 of the General Rules.
“3.12.4 Precedence
The General Rules have precedence over the Association Reference Manual in case of any
conflict. The General Rules also have precedence over all other programme documentation,
official or otherwise; e.g. Activator’s Guidelines, etc. Where the General Rules have been
translated into other languages, the English version has precedence over other language
versions in case of any conflict.”
When you request P100 because of paucity of P150 summits and there is insufficient data available at the time such that it is accepted - then when mapping and topography resources such as have become available through the the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission and other mapping improvements, demonstrate that in fact you do not have a paucity of P150 summits and your original claim was incorrect, should it just be allowed to continue or be corrected. I am afraid I think correction is needed.
It is in the DM ARM 2.0, and in similar versions between 2005 and 2009 I suppose.
Thanks for the reminder of the rule that supersedes that …
Just wanted to express my feeling about how it feels to get cut twice.
No more comments from my side.
73
Lars
2 Likes
But if you added to your summit lists many summits - in fact over 3000 which had prominences from 100m down to less than 20m as I can see from the 25k maps I have of Germany, can you really complain about the first correction.
Hi Lars,
they are in fact not interested in your (our) feelings, they benefited from the large activity in Germany at the beginning of SOTA. We made the summits-lists and activated a lot and now we are called “costumers”. Ham-Spirit quo vadis?
The british as a fighter for a unified system I find something ridiculous.
An island with left-drivers and fighters against the Euro 
Vy73 DL4FDM
2 Likes
I think this is the type of unfair comment we should never enter into.
Guys, if you are going to get nasty, Brian will come along and close the thread till everyone cools down.
Now if you want to attack something, attack the the argument not the person.
This is a clear breach of the Acceptable use policy, it combines accusations of bad faith with racial stereotyping - it is entirely unacceptable and I give you a public warning that if there is any repetition then your access to the Reflector will be terminated. I also find it peculiar that you appear to have more than one reflector account. This must be rationalised.
I am forced to once more close this thread. I will re-open it after a suitable period for tempers to cool down. A warning: if I have to close it for a third time it will not be re-opened.
Brian
Right, this topic is now opened again for rational discussion. Please read the AUP before making angry posts. It is at the foot of the Sotawatch page, so no personal attacks, keep it civil or it will be locked permanently.
Brian
1 Like
The exciting news is that the proposed route and plans for the new M104 motorway were announced this morning. According to the architects plans, the new road, which will connect Leek in the Staffordshire Moorlands to the M6 at Knutsford, will pass through a deep excavation of land at Danes Moss. If my interpretation is correct, this will mean that New Farm (aka Great Weston Fell) on the west of Macclesfield will jump from being only valid for the WAB Trigpointing Award, to P150. This is great, as it is only half a mile from my QTH.
As the Database cannot cope with an increased volume of G/SP region logs, the G association manager has advised that a new region called “Additional Fells” has been specially created. The reference, therefore, will be G/AF-001. The start date for the new summit will be 1/4/2016 to give everyone plenty of time to get used to the idea.
3 Likes
By my reckoning this post is 40 minutes late!
Brian
1 Like
I was waiting for you to reopen the thread! And then for my lunch break!
1 Like
Hello Friends,
please note - I am not writing to upset more people or anything like that.
I am just writing because I got questions to my post, and would find it unfair not to answer.
Jim, to your quote above, I think the answer is in my post already: “Okay, too many peaks were added then under the exception rule. That was called an error.”. So, I am not complaining about the first correction. I just wanted to state that this was written in the DM ARM rules. And since somebody claimed before that the initial DM management did not know anything about prominence level, I would rather say that this practice was known on both sides. If it was 50-50 or 70-30 or 30-70 - that is not worth the discussion. At least it was not 100/0, i.e. not known to one ore the other side.
For the correction in 2008, it was not the intention of DM to cheat anybody with a too high summit density. The proposal was made to keep the programm running. The density rule was defined later on.
So, its my personal feeling to get cut twice. Okay, no more personal feelings from now onwards.
Just to state my preferences in order
- status quo
- P100 overall (#1 and #2 are somehow the same)
- P150 overall (without any exceptions)
But if #3 is selected by the MT or by the majority or by some other decision progress - I will have to adapt.
Actually, I grew up in East Germany. When the wall came down I was 16. Changes happen. Not always nice. But they also give chances for new things. In my case - HF activations under GMA. I am not saying that to threaten anybody. It is actually more orienated to activators that prefer #1 and/or #2 - it is one way to cope or to adapt if #3 is selected, even if one is really adicted to SOTA.
Personally, I do not want to drive more than 1h (one way) on a normal weekend day. And I actually prefer to activate two summits with a hiking trip, not with the car inbetween. That is rather difficult now with SOTA, but impossible with #3. But said again, that is based on my personal hiking preferences. That should not be linked to the P100/P150 discussion. I am just saying that in the context with “changes give new chances”. And for me that is GMA. If I hear your thoughts like “these are not real summits”. Yes, they may even not be compliant to P100, but for instance a hiking trip of Breiter Stein and Schöne Höhe has total ascent of about 350m because there is a river valley inbetween. Other trips had 500m ascent for such summits, like Schanzberg and Waitzdorfer Höhe in Saxony Switzerland (both not P100). Sorry, getting off topic.
If advertising for GMA is not appropriate on the SOTA reflector, please let me know.
73
Lars DL8WJM
4 Likes