One final controversial thought - democracy doesn’t come into it. Just
because a majority of those who make their feelings known want or
don’t want a change, doesn’t necessarily mean the majority are right
about the potential benefits or otherwise of the change to the
Programme…
73 de Paul G4MD
I have to agree with that comment Paul, which leaves just one obvious way to get to the real answer…Give the participants the chance to vote on it!!
The rules altered in Tom’s announcement do not refer to the process of altering ARMs, only to the parameters contained therein. Thus any other Rules must be of the same standing as previously.
The prerogative of the AM to add or delete summits within the agreed parameters is clearly enshrined within the General Rules. However, when the parameters themselves change, I would deem this to be a “proposal” within the meaning of Rules 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 and would thus require approval by the MT
Again, a matter of interpretation and I am just as likely to be wrong as you - no need for apology or humble pie consumption whichever way it goes. In fact I owe you an apology for appearing dismissive in my previous post rather than stating my reasons, i hope you will accept it.
It’s one of those many grey areas which are open to the interpretation of the reader, similar to the final approach on foot - how far, but let’s not get into that.
I have had a quick look and can see it both ways to be honest.
The reason I claim that the AM had a choice to alter at one time was because an MT member suggested that someone put their proposal to M0ZZO as it was in his power to make the changes, this was in the past few months in the thread that Ian KXV was involved, and James made HIS decision which he posted on this reflector, I must search back and see what was actually said.
73 Mike GW0DSP
PS You didn’t comment on my last post re the vote.
I recall the thread well, at the time I had the understanding that any change would be a two-stage process - first persuade James of the benefits of the change, then he would take the proposed change to the MT for ratification. Again my interpretation at the time, if a member of the MT said something different then who am I to argue?
My comment re the vote was a throw-back to James’ comments on rejecting adopting humps where he stated a majority of people who had contacted him wanted to retain the status quo. My point was that even if a majority vote for or against, the majority aren’t necessarily voting for what is best for the programme, that can best be determined by rigorous analysis and argument.
So I’m afraid my vote’s not for a vote…
In reply to G4MD:
Hi, Paul, for what its worth I think you are right.
I dropped out of the discussion last night to see how it developed and to do a bit of quiet map work. It is surprising how long it takes to spot possible P100 summits in LD, but there are a useful number of them there, and they add a number of new multi-summit mountain walks…and you will remember in an earlier discussion that I abandoned my conservative stance when the opportunity for multi-summit ridge walks under P100 rules was pointed out. I have not changed my mind again.
It is up to to James, M0ZZO to make a proposal, it would be improper for the MT to intervene, but any proposal would be carefully considered without knee-jerk reactions, you can be sure of that!
The way forward is for those that feel that the application of the P100 parameter to English summits would be a positive move to write to James, clearly setting out the reasons why they are of this opinion. With the latest ruling, it could be that the climate has changed since the subject was last aired. Not only may more participants now feel that this is the way to go, but the AM and the MT may be better minded to agree to the change.
73, Gerald
P.S. I see there were some insomniacs last night Anyway Brian, the HuMPs are actually listed, so you need not have poured over your maps… but it is a pleasant thing to do anyway, isn’t it!
P.S. I see there were some insomniacs last night Anyway Brian, the
HuMPs are actually listed, so you need not have poured over your
maps… but it is a pleasant thing to do anyway, isn’t it!
I know of the HuMPs list but haven’t looked for it yet. What I was doing (and you are right, it was a pleasure, not a chore!) was looking at various circuit walks in LD, many of which I have done in the past, to see if they become multi-activation walks. I found some right crackers!!!Look for instance to the west of Wastwater, the Copeland Forest. Under P100 you get to activate Middle Fell, Seatallan, Haycock, an excursion across Scoat Fell (which doesn’t look on the map as if it satisfies P100) to Pillar and back, finishing with Yewbarrow. A mouth-watering five activation circuit for strong walkers with pack-horse tendencies! It could of course be shortened by leaving Pillar for the Ennerdale Skyline.
“A mouth-watering five activation circuit for strong walkers with pack-horse tendencies!”
If the P100 parameter applies at some time in the future, I can see John YSS being the first to conquer this - no doubt on 22nd December so a bit of a challenge is involved!
In reply to All:
This is getting really crazy now… quaotations of rule 3.1415926 subsection 3 para 4 line 6 states blah de blah…jeez, it ludicrous !!
For goodness sake…what detrement, I repeat, to what detriment would adding a few more summits have to the program ? If it makes SOTA more accessable to more people then surely thats a good thing, if you think it isnt give me a valid reason why its not a good thing to bring more people into SOTA. People now have the mushroom MT mist and are just arguing about things that could be considered quite insignificant really. Add a few more summits !!! why not !!! if they are humps a few 1 pointers isnt going to harm anyone, give me a reason why they would !! I cannot think of a valid argument why a few more summits would harm SOTA, some one enlighten me pls.
The decision making process in the program needs to be looked at too, the AM’s should be able to make decisions based on participant feedback, if there is an appeal against an AM’s decision then it should go to the MT for final decision, otherwise what is the point in having AM’s. Oh and I think the AM’s should be elected by the participants to serve a 12 month term and renewed at the end of this term if no one else puts up for the position, what are the management afraid of, not getting the votes??? … wonder why ?
Its a load of old baloney, someone summed it up earlier, think it was you Mike (DSP) its their bat and ball and if you dont like the game then get lost or the bat and ball will be taken home, pathetic really.
I remember the good old days of SOTA with midnight activations and everyone having a laugh and enjoying the scheme and getting out and about to play radio, now its lost all its charm, inevitable ?? I guess so.
not being an old sentimental about it and with respect, but Panos, you are new to the scheme, what the hell do you know about how it should be done, your association is but a baby and black and white rules are not always the best way forwards especially when they have to be re-written everynow and then, I think you should get a feel for how the SOTA community is now and has been in the past !!no one appreciates an overnight specialist !!
not being an old sentimental about it and with respect, but Panos, you
are new to the scheme, what the hell do you know about how it should
be done, your association is but a baby and black and white rules are
not always the best way forwards especially when they have to be
re-written everynow and then, I think you should get a feel for how
the SOTA community is now and has been in the past !!no one
appreciates an overnight specialist !!
Saddened
Lee
lots of laugh here Lee…
yes after 6 years as Greek Association manager (out of 6 that SOTA is alive) i am very happy to be “new” on the programme, thanks.
i am very happy you put your milestone to the high degree of validity and accurasy of the info we read these days on reflector
But yes ok , i feel young… no better: i am still young… so i can see things and enjoy them as they are… thank you for the compliment.
sri but laughing…
73, Panos, SV1COX
SOTA “servant” since december 2002 … lol
Thanks just what I wanted !!!
here in UK we call it true colours !!
Oh and we use the acronym LOL
Needless to say it seems you were involved since before UK SOTA was started in March 2002, wow !!! You have my sincerest apologies, but over the last 4 years I aint never heard of you until the last few months !!! LOL !
Maybe my interpretation but your negative outlook on all thats going on, leads me to believe you have been on the mushroom MT course HI oh and LOL !!
Oh sorry one more thing, try a different textual translator the one you are using is not very good !
Anyway Brian, the HuMPs are actually listed, so you need not have poured over your maps… but it is a pleasant thing to do anyway, isn’t it!
Anyway Brian, the