It's no more "closed" than a repeater with CTCSS or even a tight squelch, but
what a pain in the butt for users with equipment set properly! You hear the
repeater drop, wait for the beep, and then are doubling with someone? That's a
solution?
This sounds like the work of a passive-aggressive type who'd rather automate
the punishment than offer help. Most people coming into the hobby today come
from a world of horrid bluetooth headsets and auto record levels, and have
never seen a VU meter. "What? It matters how loud or close I am?"
In my years in broadcast radio, I often saw program directors and general
managers who wanted engineering to alter equipment to accommodate some prima
donna morning talent too lazy to exercise proper mic technique or maintain
proper levels. One particularly brave chief engineer responded, "I'm sorry,
this is engineering. You're describing a human resources problem."
I always thought it might be useful to record a local ARES net, edit excerpts
of people with really bad audio, and make them available as MP3 files on a
website afterward. You can tell someone his audio is so low you can't
understand him, but until he hears it, he may think you're just picky.
73,
Paul, AE4KR
----- Original Message -----
From: ae6zm
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 6:54 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: An advocate for a little audio compression
Sounds like, in essence, it was a closed repeater. Only those meeting some
tough standards were allowed. Nothing wrong with that, as long as one doesn't
call it an OPEN repeater. "OPEN" being anyone operating within the limits of
the FCC rules is welcome.
> > It would be ANDed with the COS, so that anyone too
> > "soft-spoken" would drop out of the repeater.
>
> > We had one repeater around here with that feature. AFAIK
> > it worked quite well.
>
.
