Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Repeater Support A Problem?  (Read 1710 times)
KG4YJR
Member

Posts: 179




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: February 21, 2004, 10:45:30 PM »

I just spent my first "work day" (actually just a couple of hours) with the main guy, Steve - WA4B who keeps our repeater and it's remote stations up and running here in Jacksonville, FL. I appreciated him showing me all the equipment and telling me what does what and he appreciated the little bit of help I was able to assist him with troubleshooting two small technical problems and one not so technical problem, fixing a broken door that secures the equipment.

73
Dave
Logged
N0TONE
Member

Posts: 173




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2005, 12:40:55 AM »

><< if your club is not primarily an emergency comms, >then by no means should you have a repeater, because >it will bring out the worst in hams. >>

>By your logic, we should all turn off our radios - no >matter what the band - so the less-well-behaved will >have no one to talk to.

Whoo, that's not my logic!

>While many of the repeater systems in the metro >Baltimore area do have some EMCOMM connection, there >are several that exist solely for rag chewing. I hear >little to complain about in the conduct of the users >on any of the systems.

Then either you are not as sensitive as the person who started this thread, or you don't have ragchewing users who don't financially suport the repeater.  That is the behavior which has been, in this thread, associated with being a not very good ham.

>Maybe our hams are better bred and reared that the >ones in your area. Then again, there is little of the >animosity towards Techs here that your comment >indicates you have.

>Lon

This whole thread is about operators who use a repeater but won't support it financially.  The starter of the thread thought this was a pretty bad thing.  I contend that this is the sort of operator that an open repeater encourages.

I have no animosity toward techs whatsoever, and actuall don't know how "techs" relate to this thread.  Techs and repeater users are not synonymous groups.  

I do confess to some animosity toward repeaters which are technically "open" (no PL control and no explicit rule that says you have to pay to use it) but whose owners harbor animosity toward those who use it but don't pay.  If you don't have a rule against it, then you should welcome it.

It's been so long since I took a license test that I doubt if I could even list what licenses exist, so I know of no reason to harbor anything against any particular class, as I'm unlikely to even know the name of the classes.  The last amateur exam that I administered was to a woman applying for a "conditional" class.

AM
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!