Hi Barry! You bring up a good point. Like yourself, I do not like to be hidebound to computers and internet for radio operations. They can make learning about aspects of equipment, ordering equipment, and other information, easier, but if the stuff hits the fan and you have no computer or internet operation, you are pretty much in the dark. That defeats the "when all else fails" aspect of ham radio, IMHO.
I had looked up one Tennessee repeater that I was curious about and completely missed the problem you noted. What I had noticed, living in SC, is that they added CTCSS tones as input/output or vice-versa such as "123.0/123.0", at least for SC. At first, this seemed like a good thing, until I realized that if they already had any PL info at all for a given machine, they just automatically assumed that it applied to input and output. Unfortunately, this is not the case in many instances.
Whether due to limitations of equipment in use, cost, some other reason, or just plain old sloppy engineering practices, many repeaters which require a tone on the input do not encode one on the output. If someone takes the info in the 2013-2014 directory as accurate, they could possibly program in machines for their area or somewhere they wish to travel and never hear the machines, because the output PL's noted do not exist.
I have long argued that they need to come up with a vetting system for volunteer reporters to keep the repeater data in the directory up-to-date and accurate. Depending solely as they do on coordinating bodies and surveys from repeater owners (who often never reply or otherwise ignore the surveys) does not yield an accurate directory. Many, to include myself, would be happy to check repeaters in range and in areas frequently traveled and verify things such as PL codes, on (or off) air status, and the like for the purpose of increasing directory accuracy.
73,
Ray KV4BL