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] 3 4 5 6 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Disneyland Resort not ham friendly...  (Read 24670 times)
K6CPO
Member

Posts: 128




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2013, 03:14:23 PM »

Boy, some of you are just totally incapable of holding a rational discussion on any topic.  I'm getting the same sarcastic remarks from the hams over on another well known site.  If you guys can't display some solidarity with someone trying to stand up for the hobby, then you deserve to get turned away when you try to go somewhere with your radios.
Logged
PBPP
Member

Posts: 40




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2013, 03:44:26 PM »

Boy, some of you are just totally incapable of holding a rational discussion on any topic.  I'm getting the same sarcastic remarks from the hams over on another well known site.  If you guys can't display some solidarity with someone trying to stand up for the hobby, then you deserve to get turned away when you try to go somewhere with your radios.
Showing solidarity is only justified when it is truly deserved. 
As such, I see no reason to stand with your position here. 
The park is private property and you've got to play by their rules.

Is that rational enough for you??  Roll Eyes

~ Mitch ~


Logged
N5INP
Member

Posts: 756




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2013, 03:54:14 PM »

The park is private property and you've got to play by their rules

He did play by the rules. He's just challenging them, and he really got no rational answer, you know, an answer backed up with objective facts? If they simply made up the rule with no objective reason, it needs to be challenged. Rules are made up all the time with no basis in fact.

Man, I just don't know about some of you. Do most of you really cower down in the face of illogical rules and simply accept what is doled out? I sure don't.
Logged

K6CPO
Member

Posts: 128




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2013, 04:08:54 PM »

For those of you that don't agree with my position, what if you lived in a community with CC&Rs and had to deal with an HOA, especially one that had regulations like "no antennas because they destroy property values" or "no antennas because they case interference and health problems?"  Would you just roll over or would you challenge those rules and try to get them changed?
Logged
PBPP
Member

Posts: 40




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2013, 04:30:52 PM »

Disney doesn't have to give any rational answer or reason why they refuse to allow ham radios on their premises. 
It is after all private property.

No, I don't cower when faced with illogical rules.  In fact I welcome the challenge.

However I don't have any sense of entitlement believing I can take my HT anywhere I choose. 
This includes private property.

K6CPO - Your example of challenging a HOA is irrelevant here.  As a homeowner in a
community, you have a vested interest in your home and its value since it is a major
investment.  Comparing it to your perceived 'right' to carry a HT to anywhere of your
choosing is simply illogical.  Your taking this refusal by Disney into ridiculous silliness.

Whine and groan all you want.... it won't change things unless you take them to court.
Hope you have deep pockets my friend.  *smile*

I've wasted entirely too much time on this so I'll quit.  I suggest you do the same.

~ Mitch ~
Logged
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 3685




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: September 28, 2013, 05:39:01 PM »

K6CPO:  The HOA analogy doesn't cut any ice with me either.  I get somewhat anal whenever someone complains about their HOA.

The bottom line is, when you move into a HOA controlled development, you know that going in and sign off on it.  Then to complain?  BS!

Same with WDW.  They have a book of rules which no doubt is quite extensive.  If they had to add a reason under each rule why that rule exists, the rule book would no doubt be humongous!
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12700




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: September 28, 2013, 07:27:20 PM »

My guess is that some of their concern is with the animation electronics, sound systems, wireless mikes, etc. The repeater on site is probably located high up somewhere away from these systems. It is well controlled in that they have tested it for interference issues, they know who maintains it and how to get in touch with them if there is an issue. That's different than having maybe a dozen people who they can't identify walking around their electronic systems with 5W HTs on various frequencies.

I'd say that the fact they permit a ham repeater on site indicates that they are not "anti ham".
Logged
K6CPO
Member

Posts: 128




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: September 28, 2013, 07:35:52 PM »

My guess is that some of their concern is with the animation electronics, sound systems, wireless mikes, etc. The repeater on site is probably located high up somewhere away from these systems. It is well controlled in that they have tested it for interference issues, they know who maintains it and how to get in touch with them if there is an issue. That's different than having maybe a dozen people who they can't identify walking around their electronic systems with 5W HTs on various frequencies.

I'd say that the fact they permit a ham repeater on site indicates that they are not "anti ham".


If so, why are FRS (Family Radio Service)/GMRS (General Mobile Radio Service) radios allowed.  Those would be just as liable (or maybe more so given their cost) to interfere than would  good quality ham HT.
Logged
K6LCS
Member

Posts: 1499


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: September 28, 2013, 07:54:41 PM »

>> ... He did play by the rules. He's just challenging them, and he really got no rational answer, you know, an answer backed up with objective facts?

It is THEIR house. They are a PRIVATE ENTITY. You abide by THEIR RULES, period. They do not need to explain a single thing to us.

>> ... There's an amateur repeater on site on 149.940  ...

Really? REALLY? Isn't it actually at the Disneyland Hotel? Moot point, it makes no difference where it may be.

>> ... for those of you that don't agree with my position, what if you lived in a community with CC&Rs and had to deal with an HOA, especially one that had regulations like "no antennas because they destroy property values" or "no antennas because they case interference and health problems?"  Would you just roll over or would you challenge those rules and try to get them changed?

1. I would never move into a situation that restricted what I wanted to do with the hobby.

2. I donate to the ARRL legal funds - who are constantly working with municipalities regarding antenna restrictions.

3. I have testified before a local city council in disagreement with a pending restrictive antenna regulation proposal.

Abiding by a private party's rules regarding amateur radio ops is not "rolling over." This is a case where five minutes of online
research wold show that Disney does not want ham HTs on the premises. Another ten minutes on hold with Guest Services to
ask a real person would have been informative, too.

I just hate whiners ...

Clint K6LCS
Logged

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
http://www.k6lcs.com
AK7V
Member

Posts: 249




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: September 28, 2013, 08:08:37 PM »

I bet with the influx of all the cheap Chinese radios that are open to TX on non-ham frequencies, illegal interference is more common than ever and we're going to be lumped in with the trouble makers, like it or not.
Logged
K6CPO
Member

Posts: 128




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2013, 09:03:39 PM »

>> ... There's an amateur repeater on site on 149.940  ...

Really? REALLY? Isn't it actually at the Disneyland Hotel? Moot point, it makes no difference where it may be.


I've sent an e-mail to the repeater trustee but haven't received a reply yet.
Logged
WB2EOD
Member

Posts: 215




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: September 28, 2013, 09:38:23 PM »

Been to WDW years ago when the kids were younger. Given the entertainment value and what it cost take the trip, ham radio was at the absolute bottom of the list of things to do.  I brought the HT along but left it in the hotel during the day.  In the evenings, from my hotel room I had some real interesting QSO's with some hams who were Disney employees.  I was later able to meet them and saw things not generally open to the public.

73
WB2EOD
Logged
K6LCS
Member

Posts: 1499


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #27 on: September 28, 2013, 09:48:37 PM »

>> ... I've sent an e-mail to the repeater trustee but haven't received a reply yet.

Why in the world bug the repeater owner?

Just apologize to all the groups you've posted this, and move on with life.

Clint Bradford K6LCS
Logged

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
http://www.k6lcs.com
K6LCS
Member

Posts: 1499


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #28 on: September 28, 2013, 09:52:49 PM »

>> ... I bet with the influx of all the cheap Chinese radios that are open to TX on non-ham frequencies, illegal interference is more common than ever and we're going to be lumped in with the trouble makers, like it or not.

I live in the most populous region of the nation's most populous state, and have been dreading what COULD
occur out here. Fortunately, such "abuse" is not widespread.

Clint K6LCS
Logged

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
http://www.k6lcs.com
N5INP
Member

Posts: 756




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2013, 04:43:06 AM »

First of all Mr. Clint, why don't you learn how to do a proper forum quote? The way you are quoting makes it hard for members to tell who the quote is from.

This quote is from me, just so everybody knows -

>> ... He did play by the rules. He's just challenging them, and he really got no rational answer, you know, an answer backed up with objective facts?

That is the wrong way to quote in a forum ^^^

This is the correct way -

It is THEIR house. They are a PRIVATE ENTITY. You abide by THEIR RULES, period. They do not need to explain a single thing to us.

and ... what does that have to do with the point. What if they had rules that women couldn't bring in lipstick. What if they didn't allow people with gold teeth because they said they would reflect the park radio waves and cause interference? Sound stupid? If they had such rules they should be challenged.

I could care less if it's a private entity. If they make rules that are stupid then they should be challenged. If they don't care about objective facts then so be it, but they should be challenged if a rule is stupid and has no basis in reality. What do you not comprehend about that?
Logged

Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next   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!