From: jab@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Alan Barrow)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:29:19 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard NARC Atlanta

In <1k1hukINNb7m@tamsun.tamu.edu> kurt@cs.tamu.edu (Kurt Freiberger) writes:

>|> SELA (South Eastern Linking Assoc) has communicated with the Cactus
>|> folks, and found the technology and attitudes lacking. (It does work,
>|> but did not appear to be anything outstanding, per the SELA member
>|> I discussed this with.)

>My, my, technological snobbery in the heart of the Liberal seat of "Power
>to the Public"!!!

get a life, Kurt... This is a comment regarding the technical argument
that linking requires closed repeaters. I have seen multiple examples of
open linked systems that equal or surpass the Cactus system in
capability.

Using the "fragile technology" excuse for closed repeaters will never
wash. There are too many working examples.

>|> You turn on your lid filter, and he goes away. See above postings.
>|> Closed repeaters draw these guys like magnets. This is not a problem

>So do discussions on closed/open repeaters, it would seem.

You cannot address the real issue, so now you call anyone with a
difference of opinion a Lid. No wonder closed repeaters have problems.

>|> Well, these guys are pioneering 1200, 900, and 10Ghz locally just like
>|> they did for 440, 220, ATV, and other areas. Some examples:
>|> 
>|>     ATV 1200 in 430 out rptr
>|>     ATV 900  in 430 out rptr
>|>     Shuttle video rebroadcast on the  430 output
>|>     900 Mhz audio link for 2m/440 rptr
>|>     (New) 10 Ghz audio link
>|>     900 nbfm rptr in the works.
>|>     GE mstr II converted to 220
>|>     split site 10m rptr, linked with 440. All GE, (no rangers here)
>|>     split site 6m rptr, same as above

>My, my, I AM depressed.  From the tone of this epistle, apparently no one 
>outside of your area will ever be technically competent.  We should all 
>pilgrimage to the Seat of All Knowledge to harken to the True Word of Amateur
>Radio and learn the True Lore.  'Scuse me, I must go sldege hammer all 
>of my ham gear and prepare for the journey.  Dominie non sum dignus.

Sorry Kurt, you must not have read the original post. Jay "The ignorant
splut" Maynard implied (as has others) that closed repeaters are the
only ones doing work in other bands. If you had really read my post you
would see that I described these guys as not technically brilliant, but
just have lots of energy and enthusiasm. 

Which brings us to the obvious answer to the technical justification
for closed repeaters: If a bunch of bubba's with high school educations
in Ga can make a linked system with lots of features work well and
remain open, then why can't the closed repeater crowd?

The technical argument is invalid. Choose to be closed if you wish, but
do not expect sympathy based on technical excuses!

>Fecus maximus.

If you could/would read original posts as much as you refer to your
"Latin for Mindless Idiots" guide you would be much better off.
Is this required reading at Texas A&M? 


 Alan Barrow  km4ba | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack
 jab@atl.hp.com     | ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched
                    | C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
 ..!gatech!kd4nc!   | All those moments will be lost in time -
         km4ba!alan | like tears in rain. Time to die.          Roy Batty