In reply to F6ENO:
It would assist chasers in both schemes if DMA selected different frequencies.
73
Roy G4SSH
In reply to G4SSH:
Yes Roy,
But frequencies are free… and if a GMA activator wants to key on 7.032 like now, we can’t say nothing. Only ask him to respect QRP segment if he is QRO.
73 Roy and Merry Christmas
Alain
In reply to F6ENO:
And as said Les, we don’t know if GMA uses the same rules as SOTA,
such as reaching the summit by human power, avoiding permanently
installed power or fossil-fuel genreators, etc… etc…
The website of the GMA is down at the moment.
Alain the rules to go on the summits are the same as in SOTA…no generators, no permanetly power etc.
73 de Tom
In reply to F6ENO:
As I see it, Alain, where the GMA summit is also a SOTA summit, and assuming my understanding is correct that the GMA scheme uses the same activation rules, then points can be claimed for both schemes and will appear in the database as a SOTA activation. The GMA summits that are not SOTA summits will gain no SOTA points as the database will not accept them. There is bound to be some confusion at first, but when things settle down and all activators and chasers understand the two systems then I think the two schemes will co-exist in harmony.
73
Brian G8ADD
In reply to G8ADD and DL1DV:
There is bound to be some confusion at first, but when
things settle down and all activators and chasers understand the two
systems then I think the two schemes will co-exist in harmony.
OK Brian and Tom, I hope all will be clear in few day.
73
Alain
In reply to F6ENO:
GMA on 7.032 now (QRP freq) !
You’re trying to be funny, right?
73 Norby
In reply to DL4FDM:
In my eyes it is necessary to divide both, the activator and the
chaser-honor-roll into a “deleted” and an “active”
list now (like DXCC), otherwise it´s a bit frustrating to
“newcomers” to the SOTA-programm.
Fritz,
To separate lists could cause a lot of confusion and I feel that it is not necessary. SOTA is not a competition, it is a personal achievement. I started in February 2006, so should I ask for a database starting at that date so that I can compare myself to everyone else? No, of course not. Also, I have activated 2 summits in England that are no longer valid, so should they no longer count towards my score? No, of course not.
It is about time we started to realise that this is not about making a comparison with others, but just about our own experience. I do not see that there is a problem when rules change, after all, they change for everyone.
Merry Christmas and 73,
Gerald G4OIG
In reply to G8ADD:
Then what happens when SOTA adds a summit? A new summit is given the next number in sequence, eg BW-845. But what if GMA has already used BW-845 as a reference for a completely different summit? Should SOTA have to have huge gaps in its numbering? I would say no. But then SOTA and GMA references start to conflict.
Also, how did this situation arise in the first place? Why did DM have summits listed that didn’t meet the prominence requirements?
In reply to M0FFX:
Good questions!
I understand that the coincidence of designations between SOTA and DMA is temporary and the DMA will change their format but not the numbers, so any confusion will be temporary. As summits are added the numberings will perhaps diverge but the different formats will not allow confusion - and in any case, a new valid SOTA summit would presumeably also be valid for DMA.
One reason that the DM situation arose was that the MT did not have the facilities to check every summit of every Association and had to take on trust that every summit conformed to the prominence requirement, a requirement that seems occasionally to have been misinterpreted due to language difficulties.
73
Brian G8ADD