The MT had a chance to make a significant change, yet all I see is the same old MT dictating the way it will be, with little thought to the progress of SOTA.
Tom, your paragraph “So currently, DM, with an area less than 3 times that of England, has over 17 times as many summits. Obviously, DM is a more hilly/mountainous region than G - that will always be the case. But, clearly, it will still have lots of summits, many times more than England, even if it applies a strict Prominence rule. And we can see that England, with just 179 summits, is still a most viable, active and successful association, so the argument that the loss of non-prominence summits will ruin DM SOTA, is not accepted by the SOTA Management Team.” This does nothing for SOTA PR.
What do the participants on DL/DM feel with that statement?
We are being told that England, with just 179 summits, is a most viable, active and successful association, maybe it is, but for how long? Most of the summits are above the M62 and it is still right that a participant that wants to do SOTA has to spend so much time and money travelling to summits, when there are so many that could be included. The clause which allowed subjective addition of summits not meeting that criteria that DL/DM used was a good one, maybe they went a bit OTT but with this clause we could have added quite a few new UK summits, it should have been left and included into the general rules. Common sense could have then been used to add new summits in area lacking.
What a wasted opportunity, that came as no surprise.
I am disappointed.