I just went to My Groups and clicked on Summits and found the old reflector still available. From this I went to messages and went thence to number one, which was an inaugural message from G3WGV on Tuesday August 7th 2001, setting out the initial parameters of the proposed program for discussion. I will take the liberty of quoting it here as it is freely available anyway.
"Greetings.
Now we are starting to get some folks subscribing to the Summits SOTA
group, it’s time to start some discussions. I have been generally
pleased with the reaction to the SOTA idea so far but I am very keen
to have an open dialogue via this group so that we can pool our
thoughts and, perhaps, tease out some ideas that we might not
otherwise have thought of.
I am hoping to start working on the detail of the SOTA scheme as we
get towards the autumn, with a view to being able to launch the
programme in time for next Easter (when, we can hope, the weather
will be conducive to rambling the hills with radios and F&M will be a
thing of the past - yeah, right… well we can dream, can’t we?).
In particular, I am keen that the program…
Is inclusive - that is to say, everyone can participate in some
way.
Does not fall into the trap that the RSGB Backpacker contests have
done, namely defining “backpacking” as being allowed to drive to the
site and operate from the car(!).
Rewards effort appropriately (you climb a long way, you get loadsa
points, etc.).
Is structured in such a way that it could become international.
Is fun, challenging, interesting and generally “a good thing”.
Discuss! (Here please)
73, JOhn."
At this time I was just coming to the end of an inactive period, so I don’t know how the Group was publicised, but I guess it might well have included something like RadCom since the second message was from IK2NBU. Read it all for yourselves, you can see how many people joined the discussions and how the program was hammered out!
The point to be made here is that you can see that SOTA did not come about as a result of private discussions amongst a small and select group of friends, and then sprung on the world as a fait accompli.
I feel I better comment on just a couple of points and I will leave it at that Brian. This is in no way aimed at you personally by the way.
Now we are starting to get some folks subscribing to the Summits SOTA
group, it’s time to start some discussions. I have been generally
pleased with the reaction to the SOTA idea so far but I am very keen
to have an open dialogue via this group so that we can pool our
thoughts and, perhaps, tease out some ideas that we might not
otherwise have thought of.
Point 1. Wow, the above is a shockingly refreshing thought!! The thought of open discussions about sota from those who “own” it, whatever went wrong with that concept? If only they would still do the same!!
Point 2. I have mentioned this before Brian and with all due respect, I am not interested in 2001 when just the UK were SOTA, we are now over 7 years down the road with 22 nations/regions involved and many more waiting in the wings.
SOTA has changed beyond the wildest dreams of it’s innovators. In 2008 it’s impossible to survive with the same old rules which served the UK only Sota of 7 years ago. The same has to be said for the same old style of MT domination.
I note the new addition at the bottom of the posting page, which we see prior to posting on the reflector. Does MT understand how that can be perceived?..
Don’t knock us in public by speaking the truth on the reflector, do it by email instead, so that less people can read your valid points and we can slap your wrists in a caustic private email!!
26 AM and RM from SOTA countries were involved; we had a long discussion (2 >months) abt prominence and points.
not 100% correct. Only AM´s not RM´s.
I am the regional-manager of DM/HE and the answer to my enquiry to join the SOTA-EMG-discussion was negative.
But maybe I am the only RM who got a “no”?
Bye the way - DXCC was started in 1937, IOTA in 1964.
Both of them had to revise their rules, because sometimes things
are changing
I think we both have the same bad feeling about SOTA.
Lot´s of work with the new summits-list, but finally ?
I´ll better go qrt now and get some beer :-))
“Point 2. I have mentioned this before Brian and with all due respect, I am not interested in 2001 when just the UK were SOTA, we are now over 7 years down the road with 22 nations/regions involved and many more waiting in the wings.”
Fair enough Mike, but I was answering:
“When did this “discussion” take place Brian and how many in number was this group of enthusiasts? Hardly a fair consensus of opinion when carried out by private email amongst friends.”
I am not sure what you are getting at with
“I note the new addition at the bottom of the posting page, which we see prior to posting on the reflector. Does MT understand how that can be perceived?..
Don’t knock us in public by speaking the truth on the reflector, do it by email instead, so that less people can read your valid points and we can slap your wrists in a caustic private email!!”
If you have something to say to the MT you are talking to a group, not an individual, and if you expect the MT to reply as a group then you have to allow them to arrive at a concensus on the reply. If you address the MT via this site then they cannot reply as the MT without a discussion elsewhere, and to be honest with you, Mike, I think that the remarks addressed to the MT on this site are often rhetorical in nature and a reply is not necessarily expected. Note that only a few or perhaps even none of the MT are likely to be monitoring the reflector at any one time.
You say it is impossible to survive with the same old rules which served the UK only SOTA of seven years ago. If this is true (there are those who disagree, just as Klaus and Fritz seem to agree) then replacement rules must be robust and satisfactory to the majority of participants. Once something is working then it should be changed only in a spirit of trepidation since it is proven and its replacement isn’t. Bear in mind that the participating countries signed up to the current SOTA and the countries working towards membership are working towards the current SOTA, not some possible replacement. We owe it to them to try and maintain some stability and only make consensual changes. What happens if the MT embrace a revolutionary change and half the participating countriesrefuse to adopt the change? That would effectively be the end of SOTA.
The trouble is that what some people would see as careful maintenance could be seen by others as obstructive conservatism. The MT cannot really win, can they?
Note that only a few
or perhaps even none of the MT are likely to be monitoring the
reflector at any one time.
I was making a statement to Brian G8ADD and not MT. The point I was making was that I had hoped that in light of the difficulties over the past few months that MT may have started to listen to the participants a little more, instead, they distance themselves even further by adding that statement at the bottom of this page.
Bear in mind that the participating countries signed up to the
current SOTA
Yes, they certainly did, didn’t they, ask our German friends, who also signed up and were included and gladly accepted by MT under the rules.
Well I don’t see it the same way, Mike, but we will have to agree to differ on that. I just wanted to make the point that the MT as a unit is less likely to respond here because of the process that precedes a reply, but I would hope that a reply from a member of the MT would always be forthcoming - even if it is only from me (the gabby one!)
Well I don’t see it the same way, Mike, but we will have to agree to
differ on that.
Agreed Brian
I just wanted to make the point that the MT as a unit
is less likely to respond here because of the process that precedes a
reply, but I would hope that a reply from a member of the MT would
always be forthcoming -
There have been many times when MT have no problem in making a decision in seconds, when it suits them. Two MT members in particular, live on the reflector;-)
even if it is only from me (the gabby one!)
Not at all Brian - interesting, educated and experienced maybe, gabby, never.
