In reply to G0LGS:
Stewart
Somebody emailed the then MT at the outset to highlight the fact that there was a problem. No action was taken. We must remember that there was a lot of excitement at the time, because SOTA was about to go international.
All water under the bridge now. The current MT have dealt with the problem in the ONLY way open to them, so as to give the same rules for all and thus put us all on a level playing field. When making that decision, they must have done so in the knowledge that it would make them about as popular as flatulence in a space suit, all the same, they stood firm and made the decision and must be commended for it. The current MT tried their best to alleviate the trauma of losing so many summits by allowing the adoption of P100, a magnaminous gesture which should go a long way to help replace many of the lost summits, again they should be commended for that.
The result is summit lists requiring the same values for all associations, it has to be that way. If action had been taken at the outset, maybe the hurt wouldn’t have been so traumatic. At least four or five members of the current MT were not serving on the original MT who took no action when informed of the problem, but unfortunately they find themselves in the firing line since the problem was recently brought to their attention again. They have done everything humanly possible under the current rules to put matters straight with the least hurt to the affected associations.
To get a different outcome would require a change in the rules, that is never going to happen, should it happen? I don’t know. As it stands, we have a set of rules for all associations and we all know where we stand.
Merry Christmas to all.
Mike GW0DSP