Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

Unique but not a unique


#1

I worked what I thought was a unique today with GM1ZJQ/P on GM/SS-168, but when I came to enter my spread sheet I found I had already worked GM4COX/P
on 5Mhz from there. Jack has not entered his activations for sometime so it does make the records (tables) a little bit ambiguos if that is the right word.
Does anybody else have thoughts on this ??


#2

In reply to 2E0HJD:

Just to add that I input all of my activations for that particular summit into the database immediately on my return home.

You should see the asterisks in your chaser log to confirm this.

73 Mike GW0DSP


#3

In reply to G4JZF:

I spoke to Jack about this about 2 weeks ago as I was intending to do Mullwarchar SS-073 and Craignaw SS-06 as a pair of previously unactivated hills. He told me he had done all the 2 and 4 point hills South of Glasgow and just hadn’t got around to updating the database but was going to do it soon. The longer you leave entering the details and the more you do then the bigger and more boring the chore becomes.

I have a set routine on returning from a summit to ensure things go smoothly next time…

  • unpack SLA and put it on charge
  • check 817 is clean and dry
  • enter details of activation into database
  • check log paper is placed back with 817 for next time
  • check gear is OK for next activation (no repairs needed to plugs etc)
  • empty any rubbish (fruit skin, sandwich bags) from pockets and bag
  • repack bag and plan next activation

Boring to be predictable, but having forgotten my coat once and had to abort an activation, I follow the plan to make sure everything is OK and because I enter the log ASAP, you never get behind with it. Having found a decomposing banana skin in my coat pocket a fortnight later is suitably unpleasant enough to make sure I do clean out the junk too!

You can’t force people to enter details straight away so having been caught out by this, I now plan activations on what looks like fun to do from my point of view and not what might be a first time activation.

Andy
MM0FMF


#4

In reply to G4JZF:

Graham

It is not compulsory to enter data into the database to participate in SOTA. Most people do and the MT certainly encourage it. Inevitably the database will alway be incomplete to some extent.

One of the attractions of SOTA (to some people anyway) is that very little is mandatory! We trust people not to make stuff up - those that do only fool themselves.

73

Richard
G3CWI


#5

In reply to MM0FMF:

In reply to G4JZF:
Having
found a decomposing banana skin in my coat pocket a fortnight later is
suitably unpleasant enough to make sure I do clean out the junk too!

Andy
MM0FMF

I thought it was only me did that :o) nice to know I am not along. Last time it wasn’t just the skin and it made me feel ill when I found it.

I think a lot of people use their own database and transfer the data in bulk.

I just had a strange one, I was convinced I had worked SW-019 before but it is in my uniques list for today. I will just have to check through 47,000 log entries to see if I have missed entering it into the database.

Steve GW7AAV


#6

In reply to G3CWI:
As you say it it is not compulsary, it was just that what I thought was a unique wasn’t because the previous activator had not entered his activation
so obviously the unique for a chaser relies on this being entered.

Many thanks to all for their comments.

73 Graham G4JZF


#7

In reply to G4JZF:

My routine is :-
Sunday - activate.
Monday - go to work & spend 2 hrs inputing to the database - unless it`s bank holiday & I do this chore on Tuesday ;-))


#8

If any activator so minded, is planning to pick off some previously unactivated summit, it is always worth checking the Chaser Uniques table working down the top 20 or so relevant chasers with a quick search of their lists for the summit to see if anyone has recorded it just in case no activator has entered their data - slightly easier to do in Firefox than IE. Not 100% reliable but always worth a quick check.

On the subject of SS-168 to which Graham refers, there is some interesting reading about this summit - just google “james irvine deephope”