The SOTA database

Notices
21

In reply to GW0DSP:
I have to agree with Tom’s comment which doesn’t say ‘obo’ and therefor is a personal comment which ALL are entitled to make - and I’m not joking.
Mike you seem very bitter that someone interprets the rules differently to you.
I think I understand what you are alluding to - but who are you to decide what can or can’t be entered on the database? You asked for a decision and ,I believe, you were given one. I see no difference between someone entering only their StoS chases than someone deciding only to enter their chases for a specific year. This is not manipulation but a personal choice by an individual. SOTA is an individual thing not a competition.
Mick ever since I’ve known you you have been anti MT, I respect your views but any claim that you have majority support are purely fiction. This reflector is NOT representative of anything. There are very few posters in terms of SOTA participants.
I like to be part of the ‘silent majority’ unless I feel there is something seriously wrong. In this case I feel the wrong is on your side.
PLease ,if you have a problem take it up with the appropriate people directly and leave this reflector for it’s intended purpose.
To everyone else I am seeking neither support nor dissent and would ask that this thread is allowed to die.

Roger G4OWG

22

In reply to MM0FMF:

Andy, I respect you greatly and this reply is intended as an honest reply and not as a verbal attack on your good self. Hang on let’s make it officially funny;-) Phew there you go now I’m excused!! No, sincerely Andy, I agree with you to a point.

Had I or others made a statement similar, with smiley or Christmas tinsel, ribbons or flowers, we would have gotten our nether regions chewed right off, not a single doubt about it, it appears that some can get away with snide remarks by use of the :wink: and others are always tarred as passing snide remarks and or causing trouble

Best regards Mike

PS I did make it clear that I know Tom was joking, but a little bit of thought would have told anyone with a bit of common sense that the timing stunk considering this thread in particular.

23

In reply to G4OWG:

In reply to GW0DSP:

I have to agree with Tom’s comment which doesn’t say ‘obo’ and
therefor is a personal comment which ALL are entitled to make - and
I’m not joking.

I respect your right to your opinion on the remark.
Well it certainly was a personal comment and it was taken personally - and I’m not joking either. If I’d have made that comment would it have been taken it in the same light?

Mike you seem very bitter that someone interprets the rules
differently to you.
I think I understand what you are alluding to - but who are you to
decide what can or can’t be entered on the database? You asked for a
decision and ,I believe, you were given one. I see no difference
between someone entering only their StoS chases than someone deciding
only to enter their chases for a specific year. This is not
manipulation but a personal choice by an individual.

Are you aware of the full facts here Roger? It’s obvious someone has given you their side of the story by your statement above, I am not anyone to decide!! that’s why I took it to MT, I know that anyone can enter whatever they want in their log, as long as they leave it there, ssb only, cw only, one band only, I don’t have a problem with that, what I do have a problem with, is when someone enters over 3 years worth of chaser log, takes the kind remarks and congratulations from his peers on the Reflector for reaching a goal and then decides to delete 2 years and 3 months worth from that same log and leaves just 10 months in, just to make themselves look as if they have achieved another certain target/record. It’s especially annoying when in doing so that it takes away that same target/record from one of their fellow participants, who has worked solidly towards his own personal goal. If selfish actions like that is “within the spirit” please tell me how. 2/3 of a log was deleted, in my eyes that is database manipulation on a grand scale, in MT eyes it is not. I accept MT decision and had put this issue to bed until Tom’s remark lit the blue touch-paper. I will now try and put it back to bed again, but be sure that if anyone passes further remarks then I will respond.

SOTA is an individual thing not a competition.

It is Roger, thats why I set myself a personal target, which I achieved in record time, but then, that personal target was stolen away from me by the selfish actions of a fellow paticipant. Ask yourself honestly, do you think it’s within the spirit to remove 3/4 of a log? especially when it affects others.

Let’s ask if anyone else thinks it’s ok?

73 Mike

24

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

Does anyone else feel this way?

Hi Jon,

I for one have been rather surprised and concerned by the terse manner and finality of some of the responses that have been made on behalf of the MT. In relation to some of the ideas that have been put forward by members in recent months, it has come across (to me at least) that they have received little consideration and have been summarily dismissed. Sometimes I am left wondering whether the MT think that SOTA was created perfect, so all attempts to modify it are therefore rebuffed.

With regards to the public face of the MT, would it not be appropriate for one of the team to act as PR Officer and be the point of contact with the members on the reflector and via email? I appreciate that this would create an additional workload for that person, but it would ensure uniformity and hopefully satisfy some of the complaints that have been aired.

In respect of the issue that Mike raised with the MT, I would say that I am fully aware of the situation. It seems to me that some of the comments that have been made, both by the MT and individuals, have been very unsympathetic and I just wonder how those making the comments would feel if they were in Mike’s position. The matter is a moral one and I fully appreciate that it is therefore difficult for the MT to handle, but a little care in formulating responses would not have gone amiss. I have concerns myself about a couple of similar issues, but as in life in general, I’m afraid that I have to accept that others have a different moral standpoint to my own.

As I said, that’s life! SOTA is no different.

73,

Gerald G4OIG

25

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

Does anyone else feel this way?

73, Jon

Hi Jon, you asked so I will offer you my opinion. I basically agree with Gerald, especially his comments about Mike’s situation, put yourself in Mike’s position and give it some thought, whoever removed most of their log was not acting in the true spirit of sota.

73 Barry M3PXW

26

In reply to M3PXW:

OK, there seem to be two issues here.

Firstly, the specific issue that Mike has raised. And secondly, a charge that the MT has been terse, unresponsive to new ideas and remote.

On the first issue: It is incredibly difficult for the MT to respond in any other way than it has on this one. The original post above was an attempt to communicate that there are many reasons why the database is innacurate anyway before one even gets to considering things outside the spirit of SOTA or even in the realm of cheating. The only place that the MT can seek to apply the rules of SOTA is in the issuing of awards which really is the basis for the rules. In this case then, logs are examined and considered as to whether they meet those rules. However, beyond that, the database is just that, a public database.

I really don’t think there is anything else to be said or done on this. Mike, I am sorry that you feel wronged here. Maybe doubly wronged since you don’t feel the MT response is that which you would have liked.

If you want to continue to pursue this, please email me or the other MT members offline and we will try and respond the best we can. However, I really feel we need to give the reflector some relief from this. It is emotionally wearing for all concerned to try and sustain this thread.

Secondly, on the charge of terseness and unresponsiveness. I have one comment to make in defense of the team. There is a very interesting disparity of perspective here! It seems that from outside the team some see the MT as aloof, and to use Mike’s term, school masterish.

However, from our perspective, we are just a bunch of volunteers who often feel embattled, criticised and at many times wonder why on earth we bother. Perhaps if responses seem terse sometimes then it is from a place of exasperation and even depression (I put my hand up here, I was going to spend the afternoon yesterday working on the website but felt like chucking the whole thing in and as it was just went off and did something else! I know the other members of the MT feel the same as this many times.). An innocent remark (and an attempt to inject humour and a light spirit) from Tom above seems to us interpretted in one way, and yet different standards seem to be place as to what is acceptable the other way around.

Further than that, I can only apologise. SOTA is supposed to be fun! A hobby. The purpose of the MT is to try and make it as successful as possible for those who enjoy it. Sometimes people get hurt and then it becomes incredibly difficult to manage and I have no doubt that we are perhaps not brilliantly equipped to deal with that. Sorry for where we could have done better here.

73, Jon

27

In reply to GW0DSP:

what I do have a problem with, is when someone enters over 3 years
worth of chaser log, takes the kind remarks and congratulations from
his peers on the Reflector for reaching a goal and then decides to
delete 2 years and 3 months worth from that same log and leaves just
10 months in, just to make themselves look as if they have achieved
another certain target/record. It’s especially annoying when in doing
so that it takes away that same target/record from one of their fellow
participants, who has worked solidly towards his own personal goal. If
selfish actions like that is “within the spirit” please tell

Mike,

Sorry if I have missed something here, but:

Whilst I can see that someone removing their own activator log entries (for whatever personal reason or aim they might have) means that any corresponding entries in everyones chaser logs DO NOT now have a matching entry in the database, I fail to see how that affects anyone in any other way. The rules do NOT require a match to claim points for any awards.

As fas as I can see, removing chaser log entries only really affects the individuals results (as they appear in the database), whilst that might well give a false impression of what they have really achieved I fail to see how that has any detrimental effect on any other persons achievements.

Please feel free to discuss this further off-line if you wish.

Stewart.
g0lgs(at)g0lgs(dot)co(dot)uk

28

In reply to GW0DSP:
Mike let me clarify my reasons for thinking you are wrong on this occasion.
The purpose of the database, as I see it having carefully read the website, is to allow an individual to post information in order to make a claim for a SOTA award. Unfortunately some like yourself see it as proof of other things. This can never be the case as:-
1 Not everybody contributes to the database.
2 Some are selective in what they contribute.
3 There are transcription errors in the database.
What is on the database is personal to one individual and callsign. Any claim for a ‘first’ can not be backed by the database.
I think we all know by now that you were the quickest to supersloth from scratch. That is and never will be in doubt, but that is not a SOTA award. It is a personal achievement. On the above grounds I suggest you can have no grievance with the MT decision.

Sorry for prolonging the thread but having re-read my post from last night I felt I could have been a bit more subtle :slight_smile: I will make no further comments on this subject :slight_smile:

Roger G4OWG

29

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

Jon, as I stated above, I accept MTs decision on this issue and had put it to bed. Tom woke it up. Tom is a highly intelligent man and should have known the type of response that remark would bring.
I’ll repeat Jon, I accept MTs decision on this issue.

73 Mike

PS How about that pint in January?

30

In reply to G4OWG:

In reply to GW0DSP:

What I don’t and will never understand, is the fact that nobody has even bothered to ask the individual why he did it in the first place considering the rumpus which it created, it seems that I have been made the bad guy and not the person whose actions started all this, he did it even after having the situation clearly explained to him in a series of emails PRIOR to him removing over 2/3 of his log. He was told prior to removing his log and even replied to me, saying that he fully understood the situation, but still went ahead and did it anyway.
10,000 chaser points brings about an official SOTA certificate. In my opinion to remove over 2/3 of a log having reached that official certificate target of 10,000 points and accepted the congrats from your peers on the Reflector seems very strange in the least.

Sorry for prolonging the thread but having re-read my post from last
night I felt I could have been a bit more subtle :slight_smile: I will make no
further comments on this subject :slight_smile:

I had no problem whatsoever with your posting Roger, in fact you are one of the few who say it as it is, I prefer that style.

73 Mike

31

I have been reading this thread and understand where everyone is coming from but I also see some issues on some of the comments made.

He is my take on some of those, and I apologise if I offend anyone, that is not my intention.

Les, G3VQO Said, “SOTA is not inherently a competitive activity”, Are you sure on that statement, there is an area in the database where you can compare how you are doing against others and giving you a position against others… Non competitive, I don’t think so, any list like that will make it competitive, it’s human nature to compare so please don’t tell me it is non competitive when SOTA actively publish a “Role of Honour” and have Awards!

I see why Mike, GW0DSP has an issue with what was done on the database. In my opinion, (My opinion!) it was not that the database was changed by an individual for that individuals own reason and the fact that it can be changed to suit. It was why that individual did it. It was changed out of spite as far as I understand. This goes back to the comment above, “SOTA is not inherently a competitive activity”, there is pride here, whether it was personal or not, it’s there in black and white and this is because the SOTA MT made the decision to have a “Role of Honour” on there. The MT are guilty of not helping an individual that asked for help to a problem they created.

Do the MT look at suggestions and comments and give then serious consideration. In my opinion no, that is the impression the MY give to me, I have been kicked in the teeth a few times and it does feel that way. There is an attitude of “if it aint broke don’t fix it”, ”if its broke don’t fix it” and if it’s a good idea or suggestion just give a curt reply as the MT know better. There have been some very good ideas suggested, and everyone has been knocked back in some way. Do the MT really have the best interests of SOTA in mind, do they really want SOTA to grow and expand?

I also think SOTA has a secret handshake mentality and if you are not part of the select few you just aint part of it at all, no matter what you say.

Jon, GM4ZFZ, you made a comment about, “chucking the whole thing in”, well if you feel that way, should you be doing the website? I manage a lots of websites, I do most of them for free and they take my time, quite a bit of time. I however take pride in what I do. I have been in the same situation as you, thinking the same when I get negative comments, no thanks or no recognition for spending hours working on a site. However I was the one that volunteered to do the work so I get on with it. If it is too much work then get others involved. There are quite a few participants, (I like to use the word member here, but we have been down that route) that may like to contribute to the website and would be able to add to the website. Mike, GW0DSP, for example does the news, not picking on you Mike, just that I think you do a good job with the news and find it a great shame that it gets lost in the forum, its posted on here, why? This work should be posted on the website, with images etc… It will also help add content to the site.

In my option SOTA is going to stay the same and never evolve if this attitude continues. SOTA adds a new dimension to amateur radio and could add so much more. The founders of SOTA should take pride that participants want to get more involved and have suggestions to improve SOTA.

32

In reply to 2E0KPO:

The MT have taken on a huge amount of suggestions for SOTA & SW. In fact both have been developed in open discussion. That is one reason why we feel the current rules are fairly robust. We are very busy bringing new international associations on board (Les and others in the team have been and are putting much effort into this), so it difficult to see that SOTA is stagnating).

Mike, GW0DSP, for example
does the news, not picking on you Mike, just that I think you do a
good job with the news and find it a great shame that it gets lost in
the forum, its posted on here, why? This work should be posted on the
website, with images etc… It will also help add content to the site.

That’s a good idea. I think it would work well on the website. Especially since newcomers to SOTA may not make it to SOTAwatch.

I am also working with GW4BVE to figure a way of incorporating the Flickr group as well.

The founders of SOTA should take pride that
participants want to get more involved and have suggestions to improve
SOTA.

I’m not a founder but I am encouraged by the growth and spread of SOTA. We received another new association enquiry just in the last couple of days.

73, Jon

33

In reply to GW0DSP:

Jon, as I stated above, I accept MTs decision on this issue and had
put it to bed. Tom woke it up. Tom is a highly intelligent man and
should have known the type of response that remark would bring.

Do we really need to feel we’re walking on egg shells to that degree Mike?

I’ll repeat Jon, I accept MTs decision on this issue.
PS How about that pint in January?

If we can somehow disentangle, draw a line under all this and put this thread to bed, I’ll buy you two pints!

73, Jon

34

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

In reply to 2E0KPO:

Mike, GW0DSP, for example does the news, not picking on you Mike, just that > I think you do a good job with the news and find it a great shame that it
gets lost in the forum, its posted on here, why? This work should be posted > on the website, with images etc. It will also help add content to the site.

That’s a good idea. I think it would work well on the website.
Especially since newcomers to SOTA may not make it to SOTAwatch.

73, Jon

That’s an excellent idea, but if the News does eventually go on the website, I think it needs to stay on the Reflector as a sticky as well, for quick access while in Sotawatch2.

73 Mike

35

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

In reply to GW0DSP:

Do we really need to feel we’re walking on egg shells to that degree
Mike?

No of course you shouldn’t Jon and neither should any SOTA participants when replying to MT.

If we can somehow disentangle, draw a line under all this and put this
thread to bed, I’ll buy you two pints!

I tried to put it to bed, it was Tom who woke it up again.

2 pints!! No way, make it 3 pints one for each of us coming up there and you might have a deal.

73 Mike

36

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

Do we really need to feel we’re walking on egg shells to that degree
Mike?

Jon,

No-one has picked up on my suggestion relating to PR - I just hope the MT have this on their agenda for discussion.

73,

Gerald

37

In reply to G4OIG:

An excellent suggestion Gerald, I support it 100%

73 Mike

38

In reply to G4OIG:

No-one has picked up on my suggestion relating to PR - I just hope the
MT have this on their agenda for discussion.

I did actually write a reply to this earlier but didn’t send it because I really wanted to dis-engage with this particular thread.

The one problem I see with it is this: What happens when the appointed person screws up and upsets someone. There is then no-where to go. At least if I put a foot wrong here, I can slink away for a while and repent in silence! This is exhausting stuff Gerald, I can’t imagine what it would be like to have one person taking all the focus all the time.

In terms of current responsibilities Tom is actually the ‘PR guy’ but this mainly relates to magazines and other channels rather than SOTAwatch.

73, Jon

39

In reply to GM4ZFZ:

In reply to G4OIG:

I can’t imagine what it would be like to have one person taking all the
focus all the time.

73, Jon

There is no need for any one MT member to have the sole workload upon them.

Others have suggested in this thread that a simple MT username could be used to log on for official MT posts. That would de-personalise things on behalf of the individual placing the posting on behalf of MT.

There is no need for us to know which MT member has posted, but there is a need for us to know that it is an official MT posting.

73 Mike

40

In reply to GW0DSP:

There is no need for any one MT member to have the sole workload upon
them.

Gerald’s suggestion was: ‘With regards to the public face of the MT, would it not be appropriate for one of the team to act as PR Officer’.

Look, I think I have been at error here. I have tried to engage. I am sensitive to the accusation of the MT being aloof and uncommunicative. But I see no way out here. I really don’t think I am going to be let off the hook. Sorry everyone, I probably shouldn’t have got involved.

I am now going to retreat and repent in silence.

73, Jon