In reply to MM0FMF:
Thats is my only issue with regards to the other forum, I would like to not see people banned in there, that way we can thrash some subjects that we know would all get us banned in here.
Steve
In reply to G6MZX:
Geoff what can we/you say, im also banned i have not posted on that site for ages, may be because i upset them on here with a video i have, (another day) will be shown again, but who cares we dont we still live on. Steve m0sgb
Am I not pleased that I had a decent social event to go out to yesterday evening!!!
I see that once again a thread on a very serious subject has been hi-jacked and twisted round to a totally different subject and then the snipers have come out of the woodwork. Well, to my mind, the standards here on the reflector in recent weeks have dropped to an all-time low. Some may critice the Adventure Radio Forum, but look to yourselves here first before you say anything more.
Gerald
In reply to G4OIG:
I understand your feelings, Gerald, but if I try and impose subject discipline I will be spending too much time on the reflector and will be criticised for being dictatorial!
I agree that there is too much sniping going on, however much people might think they are justified it is unpleasant, and not good for the health of the reflector. If people don’t rein in their impulses I will have to start deleting.
As for the very serious subject, I’m rather afraid we’ve been left with very little to say.
73
Brian
In reply to M0KPO:
I’m delighted to see we finally agree on something.
In reply to G4OIG:
It is a serious issue Gerald. But it ignoring everything else how do you propose to resolve it? Taking the figures quoted at the start they show that in simple majority terms there is no majority support for change but just a slight majority in favour of no change. 22 people bothering to vote seems higher than I would have expected based on the number of calls you see discussing/arguing/moaning (insert own choice) on this board. Is 22 representative, if we asked everyone who has ever chased or activated would we get the same split? What should those who want a change do if the majority don’t want change? I don’t know, do you?
There doesn’t appear to be overwhelming support for change. There are people who want change. Ask the same question next year and see if there are more wanting chang? Perhaps your asking the wrong question? I don’t know. I’d love to see the issue resolved and everyone happy. But currently I don’t see how that can be reached.
Andy
MM0FMF
In reply to MM0FMF:
No, Andy, you are making a false assumption. In answer to a request for new arguments, coupled with a request that nobody re-iterates the points made last time, 22 people replied. If those 22 people had new arguments, pro or con, I find it a surprisingly high figure in view of how thoroughly the topic has been discussed in the past.
No vote has been held.
73
Brian G8ADD
An open vote would be the only way this matter would be cleared up.
But then an open vote would never happen not in SOTA
Steve
In reply to 2E0KPO:
I have just sent a vote of NO of p100 to james, by e-mail steve m0sgb
In reply to G8ADD:
I have just sent a vote of NO of p100 to james, by e-mail steve
m0sgb
There speaks a man with more summits around him than you can wave a filthy stick at 
Obviously knows something you don’t Brian!
It occurred to me that seeking to make to change from P150 to P100 is the SOTA equivalent of getting proportional representation accepted as the system for electing our parlimentarians. Many see the advantage, few are willing to subscribe to the idea.
Had we not had the awkward situation with regards to the summits in Germany and the subsequent establishment of P100 there, I would have suggested that all associations play SOTA with the cross-bar set at P150, but with a second level alongside which covered the P100 summits not within the P150 database. The P100 scheme would need to use the same facilities as the P150 scheme in order to work. Unfortunately that idea can now never happen. In my opinion, a separate P100 scheme would also be a non-starter as it would be seen as a rival to SOTA and few would subscribe to two similar schemes. WOTA by contrast is working - it is set within a limited geographical area and has caught the imagination of those living close enough to participate. To follow in the great AW’s footsteps is no mean thing!
73, Gerald
In reply to G4OIG:
There is possibly the germ of an idea there, Gerald. WOTA is brilliant but you cannot extend it out of LD, but the rules do permit Association awards, so it would be possible to set up an Association award based on P100.
73
Brian G8ADD
Well here we go again! I fully understand what people are trying to say. It would seem on the surface the P100,s were expecting a vote, so give them one.
This matter would be cleared up straight away, I really don’t know what the problem is! if an “activator” was stood on a dune in southport I would still work them so if want to activate a lump go and do it I will work you.
In the interests of all it would seem wise decision to have a vote, if the vote went to p100 then so be it. ( I would activate only the originals to mountain goat but that’s personal choice).
There are that many teddies out of prams it would form a new summit.!!
I havnt seen any of the arguments that convinces me so I stay with the current setup and if a vote came up mine would be NO change.
Rgds Keith ( who hasn’t been activating having spent the weekend wrestling weeds and studying the greenhouse cretaceous world)… wish I had a time machine.
G0OXV.
In reply to G0OXV-2:
It’s a YES for P100 from me, there’s not enough hills in the South Coast area especially the Isle of Wight.
73’s
Robert
G0PEB
In reply to G0PEB:
Its a yes from me as well Rob, despite living in the “Peak District”, only 3 summits make it into the list 
(1 more than IOW).
Its a yes for P100 for me and Sharon (2E0NBR)
It may also be worth noting that there are several other people that can not make a comment on here such as GW0DSP, M0LMP and M0PVA that I understand may also want the P100
I’m also in favour of P100
Chris 2E0FSR
I’m in favour of P100.
In reply to G0OXV-2:
Happy the way things are, My vote P150
In reply to G4OWG:
And I thought that those living amongst them thar hills would all want the status quo… how wrong I was! Apologies!
Just one thought - SOTA IS PERSONAL. We are all on a personal journey within the restrictions of time, finance and personal ability, to name just a few aspects. A change to P100 would not make it mandatory to have to activate or chase the additional summits, so those not in favour of P100 could ignore them. I would, at least until I had MG status and there were no more viable uniques to activate on a regular basis.
Gerald
In reply to G4OIG:
a yes for p100 from me also
scott
2E0RCS
In reply to M3UUM:
Just a quick check and the score is 3 against and 9 for, not bad, but still waiting for others to vote unless they have done it by e-mail, keep the votes coming. Steve m0sgb