From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Date: 30 Dec 92 20:50:18 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems

In article <8228@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1992Dec28.235602.1@ttd.teradyne.com> rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes:
>>Excuse Me ? "Invited" to use the spectrum. Where does the FCC say that ANY
>>Amateur has to be INVITED to transmit on a frequency? This kind of attitude
>>is a good part of What's wrong with ham radio today. Some people think they
>>have a god given right to a portion of the spectrum. It's theirs - they 
>>paid for it - an no one's going to take it away from them. Pure unadulterated
>>BULLSHIT.
>
>This kind of attitude is a good part of What's wrong with ham radio today.
>Some people think they have a god given right to use other people's equipment.
>It's using ham spectrum and they can use it if they damned well please. Pure
>unadulterated BULLSHIT.
>
>Your argument boils down to "If they want to spend $10K on a sophisticated
>repeater system, they have to make it a public utility". There are two
>problems with this: 1) you're dictating how other folks spend their money,
>which is as good as stealing it; 2) you're changing the rules on a lot of
>folks who, when they wanted to put up a closed system, were told "put it on
>440". Now you're changing that in midstream.

As a repeater trustee, I have a vested interest in the interference
free operation of my system. I also understand that the FCC says it's
legally permissable to operate a closed machine. But on the other hand,
I recogninze that a repeater operator doesn't own spectrum, and I think
that trying to prohibit anyone but members from transmitting on the
repeater input spectrum is at least morally wrong. 

It's the repeater operator's responsibility to maintain control of his 
repeater's transmissions regardless of who it hears on it's input. If a 
non-member transmits on a repeater's input, it's the repeater owner's 
responsibility to determine whether the repeater re-transmits that signal, 
not the amateur who is conducting a normal transmission on the input
frequency. Since that's non-trivial, requiring identifying the station to
be relayed before enabling the repeater transmitter, I've opted to operate 
our machine as an open repeater, a quasi-public utility, which is available 
to anyone who transmits on it's input. The only difference between a public 
utility and an open amateur repeater is that the control operator is under no
obligation to keep the machine in operation for any reason. If the trustee
desires to shut the system down at any time for any reason, he has that
right.

With those caveats, I say that Jay's contention that operating on a
closed repeater's input frequency is tantamount to *stealing* service 
is what's bullshit. The repeater owner is required to be in complete 
control of what signals his repeater re-transmits. It is *solely* 
his responsibility whether that transmitter keys or not. If he
decides to operate closed, then he must control the transmitter so
that it doesn't re-broadcast other than members' transmissions. No one
else has a responsibility to control that transmitter. He has no right
to lock up spectrum for his convienence in exercising his control
responsibilities.

Gary
-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,sci.electronics