I think that in our interesting discussion there is an important issue still missing: A CLEAR STANCE made by SOTA int.l organization that SOTAITALIA is NOT SOTA. Whatever is…that’s shouldn’t be a problem. The trick used by italian manager is to impose HIS OWN SOTAITALIA (with its rules, paranoia, and elitism attitude) to any people wishing to enjoy SOTA. There is an extreme ignorance and confusion in Italy on this argument, and the guy is using this mess to impose his personal vision. This, I believe couldn’t be tolerated any longer by SOTA and its managers.
Mauro, I predicted months ago that the current Italian manager would do nothing to damage his private scheme and that he has an inherent conflict serving as manager of both. Refusing to add qualified summits to the real SOTA because they don’t qualify in his personal scheme is a firing offence in the world of law and in the world of business. That is only one of his many refusals, and he has ignored multiple requests here at the MT. Only British sensibilities and politeness have allowed his tenure as manager to continue this long, and there are other complications. I have only one vote, but I agree with you that the time has come for a change, if someone qualified can be found who will take the job at this critical time. Can you recommend someone who can invest many hours very soon?
Great point of view, you’re summarizing better that many words spent before the real situation.
need 24 hours to analyse with colleagues and friends if any people could be “papabile” (as we say in Italian).
This could be done by a group. First, make a proper SOTA ARM for Italy with the summits that qualify. Then collect a group of volunteers to plow through the potential summits and document them.
For the W6 expansion, a lot of the work was done by one person, but we did have a team to dig through the questionable ones and find names.
The basic ground work has been done for almost 3 years. To see the scale of potential Italy Summits list see my post I/PM 386 Monte Cerano - position error on map and locator - #4 by G0CQK
I still have the raw data and can share that with anyone interested.
Am I allowed to modify this? Specifically replace “British” with “English” - we Scots have generally fewer sensibilities and we may be a little less “over” polite if that makes sense.
British sensibilities? Or as Jim insists, English? Please bear in mind that the guy you are complaining about was the only person to ever step up to the plate, as you Americans say, and do anything to get an Italian Association going. Without him there would quite possibly be no Italian Association today. Add to this that without anybody to take over the job the MT would have to do it themselves, which would impact on the rate of addition of new Associations and of processing updates. Finally, and this is where “sensibilities” really come into play, it is my understanding that the guy has recently had heart surgery - well, so has my brother so I know that this is not the time to put him under stress. So yes, the MT has not acted decisively, but with the only visible options being to continue in the hope that persuasion will work, or close down the Association, or add it to the MT workload, can you blame us?
A structure of helpers is a good approach.
Here is MY understanding of how it should all work:
The association manager co-ordinates and instructs the helpers what is required as regards summit definition. Prominence, how to find cols, data and format require by MT (a spreadsheet format), starting data (if any - e.g. SRTM) and suggested tools and map types to be used. This ensures consistency (mostly) in the provided data. Each volunteer (or pair of volunteers) is assigned a clearly defined region within the association to work on. Once completed the data for a region could/should be verified by one of the other regional teams and them passed to the association manager who perfroms a qauality assurance step himself before allocating the summit numbers (Ideally starting the lowest summit number within the region with the highest summits, giving them 10 points and down to the lowest with one point). The points assigned will conform to the points table in the ARM for heights of summits, which has been created to give an even spread of points across all summit heights in the association (i.e. not more high or not more low scoring summits but a balance across the heights and range of heights available - the MT can assist in chsoing the best points/height settings for an association) Once the association manager has all the regions (or all the regions that are to be added in this phase), he sends a combined spreadsheet (each tab a sepaate region) to the MT who once more verify the data before implementing it.
Often those who performed the mapping work to define the summits will be offered the role of region manager, to whom future changes (errors found, summits missed in the region, wrong summit name etc.) should be sent. In the case of a large association, it would make sense to have a second-in-charge to cover if the association manager is not available and to help in times of heavy workload.
That’s how I understand the process to work.
As you can see, EVEN with groups helping, the critical work stays with the association manager and he has the hardest job of all. Echoing what Brian says, without an association manager who is willing and able to give a lot of his own personal time, you have no association.
Let me register my personal thanks to all association managers around the world for the great work they do - thanks guys (and possibly gals?).
I think that in this discussion all is written and well explained.
I propose me as a manager for the Italian region “Suedtirol - Trentino Alto Adige” the region where I live, that is part of the Dolomiti Unesco World Heritage
- Verify the current summits
- Ad new and more simpler summits
- Correct the name of actual summits in order to use the real local name used by locals and tourists.
- All the summits will adhere to the sota official rules and not the sotaitalia limitations.
My region has a special statute and we have three ethnic groups:
German mother language
Italian mother language
Ladin mother language
Not my invention !! Sueditrorl - Wilipedia
Most of the current summits, in the Sota database, have the Italian name, invented during the “Mussolini” era.
This name in a lot of cases is not used by locals and tourists.
I could not do more, this is the my first and last offer as volunteer.
Today I’ve found this:
http://www.cqgma.de/ that’s is really interesting for me.
So I’ve an alternative.
73 de in3aqk
It’s funny, help offered, discussion ended, then…
There are movements behind the scenes, I can only ask you to stand by.
Thanks Brian I’ll wait, 73 de in3aqk
since the beginning I clearly said that I haven’t time and ambition to become a manager for Italy. My first and main interest is that SOTA, in Italy, were accessible and available to any HAM like in any other part of the world. Same rules, same pleasure, some awards, easy access to any summit etc etc…If actual manager were operative in respect of existing rules why not? alternatively SOTA central organization, ad interim, could manage summit with local support as Paolo said above and I’m ready to help him…just an help.
Now I’m leaving to Serbia with my radio, then China then…back mid next week, enjoy this long weekend!
This is the potential of the italian peaks (Thank you Jim!) http://www.g0cqk.co.uk/sota/Italy_Potential.html
Start by all this peaks and verify it, is already a good work!!!
Utopy! ! Ask to italian AM, but I don’t think he will accept. We should wait or meanwhile go to GMA
I’m sorry , but I think That the references GMA create even more confusion .
Our goal should be to have more italian peaks possible approved by the SOTA MT
To be clear Andrea IZ1TWC:
SOTA and GMA are two completely different awards, GMA shares and uses some Sota summits.
I play with Sota and GMA, and I prefer Sota if there is “the summit”. The problem is that in Alto Adige, where i live, but more generally in Italy, the summits are the same from the beginning and they follow the 45 minutes walk rule. This is a discrimination as other nations follow the 150 prominence rule and have less demanding summits.
So I was forced to play with GMA where I can insert summits myself and select it only on my pleasure basis.
BUT this is the Sota reflector and speaking about GMA is OT, I’ve only explaned why.
This is an endless discussion that does not interest no one.
73 de in3aqk
I really understand your eagerness, but do not underestimate how much work is involved in getting an Association up and running. To give an example, work started on ZL in December 2014, the outlying islands came on-line in November, North Island in December, and the big one, South Island, will soon be complete. Since we have a better starting point for Italy I do not expect it to take a year to bring the Mark II version on line, but it will certainly be many months of hard work.
Paolo, you only need to follow the 45 minutes walk rule if you want to earn the Sotaitalia award. For SOTA you follow the same rules as the rest of the world. This cannot be stated too strongly, the SOTA rules are the same world-wide, allowing for the summit-poor Associations that are allowed to use P100 and the non-metric Associations that use feet instead of metres.
I agree with you.
Sotaitalia award if you want the 45 minutes rule.
SOTA without this rule, it’s simple and with all new peaks that will be evaluated by MT SOTA (i hope!! ;)) Italy will be aligned with others Associations.