British Champs map scales

[graeme]

Issues include using laser printing, which is fine, but doesn't give the same resolution as offset litho;

Indeed. At Penhale I found the 1:15000 litho map (BOC individual) at least as clear as the 1:10000 laser version (BOC relay).

I'm still awaiting a reply from the chair of map group - maybe away?

I got a reply, in essence that the controller is also happy that the 1:10000 will be fine and fair.

[seabird]

Having to fiddle with colours/symbols/etc for printing on different printers doesn't exactly make life easier!

You only have to do it once and then it is easy to import the correct colours and symbols for any new map printed on the same printer.

RJ have you also tried reducing the other line features? I find on the Minolta that the paths often appear too dominant, and would benefit from similar reduction to what you have outlined for the contours.

[EddieH]

I've just returned from Portugal sand dunes. We had a great 1:10,000 model event on Friday - could see the ups very clearly. I was told that the mapper for the event was far better and wa looking forward to it. However he must have spent 1000's of hours in a labour of love mapping every tiny indent - what a tragic waste as it was impossible to read most of the detail at all, and the whole effect was too intricate to read fast. Maybe it might have been okay if enlarged, but detailed maps need appropriate scales, which NEED enlarging for older eyesight.

I fully concur with Big Jon that the IOF dismissal of 1:10000 is arrant nonsense. If he has surveyed for the elite at 1:10000, the oldies NEED 1:7500 and any rules bound group that says otherwise just blows my mind.

[King Penguin]

I fully concur with Big Jon that the IOF dismissal of 1:10000 is arrant nonsense. If he has surveyed for the elite at 1:10000, the oldies NEED 1:7500 and any rules bound group that says otherwise just blows my mind.

Curious - because I recall the Swiss getting special dispensation for day 3 Trocknersteig of the 2006 Swiss O at Zermatt to be at 1:7,500 for everyone, incl. Elite, because the complex detail was such that 1:10,000 was not usable, let alone 1:15,000.

[awk]

Curious - because I recall the Swiss getting special dispensation for day 3 Trocknersteig of the 2006 Swiss O at Zermatt to be at 1:7,500 for everyone, incl. Elite, because the complex detail was such that 1:10,000 was not usable, let alone 1:15,000.

One of the best orienteering events I've ever been to, but no more complex than the best bits of Culbin.

[Axel]

OK then its the middle of Feb so there should still be plenty of time for a change of decision with the map scales for M/W 50 and upwards and M/W 16 and below. Who do you have to officially write to or contact, to ask them to review the situation. It would be good to get the official line on the matter.

[Big Jon]

Axel - contact Colin Spears (chairman of BOF map group - colin.spears@bigfoot.com) or Barry Elkington - (Chairman of BOF rules group - barry_elkington@uk.ibm.com) and let them know your views. there is a meeting on 23rd Feb (next Saturday) where this will be raised.

[RJ]

Although, to be fair, it should go through your regional committee representative, and should be debated at the previous regional meeting. Obviously a regional voice should have far more sway than an individual. And in fact there is no reason why either committee should pay any attention to Nopesport either!!

We have a constitutional route for rule changes etc and we should be using it. Just because half a dozen 'voices' on Nopesport keep a thread going for a couple of weeks it doesn't mean that they have to be taken seriously!!!

That doesn't mean that those 'voices' shouldn't be heard.... just that they need to be chanelled into the system at an appropriate point.

[greywolf]

We have a constitutional route for rule changes etc

true, tho' this issue isn't about rule changes, it's about the interpretation of some imprecise guidelines, which say that an enlarged scale is "recommended" or "may be used"...

[graeme]

We have a constitutional route for rule changes etc and we should be using it.

Since you're telling us what to do, maybe you could point us at these rules...

Unfortunately, if you really want to go down the pedantry line ... we haven't had a constitution since becoming a company limited by guarantee. And when we did, there's never been any constitutional route barring individual members from communication with committees. And, as far as I can tell from the articles of association, governance review and BOF website, there still isn't.

should go through your regional committee representative,

Who is that then? Ah, we dont have one because there's never been a meeting within a daytrip of here. So do you really think that although we're staging the event, constitutionally we shouldn't comment

Obviously a regional voice should have far more sway than an individual.

Why? The "sway" is in the merit of the argument, not the person bringing it.

That doesn't mean that those 'voices' shouldn't be heard.... just that they need to be chanelled into the system at an appropriate point.

Which is, and has always been, by BOF members communicating with their committees. With the advent of email the idea that somebody has to drive the length of the country and stay in Birmingham overnight to get their voice heard would be ridiculous. And this is why such a requirement is nowhere to be found.

interpretation of some imprecise guidelines, which say that an enlarged scale is "recommended" or "may be used"...

Guidelines are imprecise with good reason. They cover things which depend on the local area where there is no unique right answer. But we do have precise rules for who is ultimately responsible - the controller. If the guidelines are to be bent, the planner and controller should understand why and be in agreement.

Graeme

(sorry to lay it on a bit thick, since we're pretty well all in agreement here, but I do find it really objectionable to browbeat people with nonexistent or made-up "constitutional rules")

[Paul Frost]

Although, to be fair, it should go through your regional committee representative...

I have just done a quick search around the BOF site and Google but couldn't find out who are the members of the Regional Committee that I would need to contact, can anyone provide the list?

And in fact there is no reason why either committee should pay any attention to Nopesport either!!

Except that the BOF website doesn't have a forum that makes it easy for these things to be discussed and Nopesport does.
The things that all Nopesport posters have in common, is a passion for orienteering and actively taking part, so they may be worth listening to sometimes.

If we want to really democratic we could ask all entries to vote on the matter (I expect that the online entry system will have a record of all the email addresses).

I wonder how many of the people entered have picked up on the map scale issue, and it will not be until they pick up their map at the start.

[RJ]

Mmmmmm......

NWOA has a number of people who attend the various committees...... competitions, fixtures, rules, mapping etc as representatives of the region. They are briefed by the executive committee of the region and following views aired at club delegate meetings, take those opinions to the relevant national committee meeting. That way the opinions in clubs are brought to the various national committees.

Nopesport seems to be creating a new route for these 'voices'. Good! But it needs more than half a dozen vociferous 'voices' airing their views on a particular subject and keeping a thread going for a couple of weeks. Things need to be decided by ALL clubs through an appropriate channel.

This particular subject/topic has considerable merit and is generating quite a bit of heat.... and I agree with the basic motion. But Axel, to be fair, should go through his regional representative. He can choose to use the more direct route, straight to the chair of the committee, but a considered debate at regional level and then that 'voice' taken to the national meeting by the regional rep is the appropriate method.

[EddieH]

Unless your region actually HAS an upcoming meeting very soon, and ALL club committees happen to meetjust before this, can you eplai to me HOW on earth there is time to make representations through such channels RJ.
Democracy voted in Hitler and Milosovic amongst others - grossly overrated in my opinion.

Anyone and everyone with an opinion is wise to contact Colin Spears and Bary Elkington directly.

[awk]

NWOA has a number of people who attend the various committees...... competitions, fixtures, rules, mapping etc as representatives of the region. They are briefed by the executive committee of the region and following views aired at club delegate meetings, take those opinions to the relevant national committee meeting. That way the opinions in clubs are brought to the various national committees.

Actually, RJ, it's a bit more complex than that in this situation. First of all the NWOA doesn't have reps attending all those groups (not committees): the rather vital one in relation to the issue under discussion, Map Group, for instance only has a chair and six specialist members, none of whom are from NW. Of course, you might have a correspondent member, but that's not quite the same thing.

Anyway, even if you did, their last meeting was in November, and this issue is now going to be discussed at Events Committee. There are no association reps on Events Committee, as it is made up of the chairs of various groups.

So, you could have quite happily discussed this issue at any meeting in the past few months, and there would have been no formal channel for your executive committee to have fed this in to the system through a 'representative', assuming that you even had one (which you don't) on the relevant group.

The fact is that the members of such specialist groups (including the chair) represent ALL of us. Therefore, it seems quite logical to me that it's the chairman of such a specialist group, the person who is actually going to be at that meeting and who is one of our representatives, who is the one to be contacted.

As for going via the association committee, I am a member of British Orienteering directly. Not through a club, not through an association. Part of that deal, surely, is that I have a right to directly contact those members of the committee who are representing me, the member. Of course, that applies to all other members too. This is something that, given BO/BOF deliberately ignored all advice to go down a route of membership via clubs and thus associations, our NGB has to accept as part of that.

I do agree with you, that the a co-ordinated association viewpoint should carry more weight, but in the unavoidable absence of that, surely some proactive efforts by individual members cannot go amiss?

[Oldman]

... Therefore, it seems quite logical to me that it's the chairman of such a specialist group, ... who is the one to be contacted.

I agree entirely. Members must always be able to make personal representations to any Group or Committee member, but usually always including the Chairman.