I'm sorry, can SOMEone please tell me how this thread related to building 
repeaters?
 
 
73 de N4SHD




________________________________
From: Ed Yoho <w6yj_ya...@67hz.net>
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 6:17:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TASMA & 70 cm band coordination





raffertysec wrote:
> It strikes me as very odd that you insist on keeping this on a Yahoo Group 
> that is nationwide instead of allowing the locals to go to a neutral place.. 
> You don't make a dime off of the advertising here, so what does it matter? I 
> referenced SCAROA two by URL oprior to commenting to you. You even replied to 
> one message. 
> 
> http://scaroa. org. SCAROA has well over 100 repeater owner members that are 
> able to speak with qanonimity until they are ready to speak in their real 
> voice. Most send PM's back and forth but it is a start.
> 
> This discussion does not need to be on a natiowide group or even a subset of 
> that group. Why do you claim ownership of a topic that you want gone anyway? 
> Take it to SCAROA. They have been working with the ARRL and the NFCC directly.
> 
> I respectfully ask the moderator to close this thread.
> 

(Kevin and Scott - please forgive the off topic post)

I am not sure where the "well over 100 repeater owner members" comes 
from as the SCAROA membership page has a grand total of eleven members - 
seven of which are TASMA board members that appear to have joined today 
(likely to see what you have been talking about) and have never posted 
there. Discounting the TASMA board members, that leaves a grand total of 
four members. Of those four, one is listed as not being a repeater 
owner. Unless my math is wrong, that leaves three independent repeater 
owners as members.

Looking at the few posts there (shall I say rants), it would appear 
whomever is posting has a negative / odd /twisted perspective of 
repeater ownership.

The repeater-builder- coordination group has 35 members. The last posting 
was in December 2007. Before that, there were three posts in January 
2007. It is a nice idea, but for whatever reason has not been well 
accepted by repeater owners.

Neither of the groups above seem to be a viable place to get the issues 
heard and discussed by a large number of repeater system owners.

I would guess that many folks who have dealt with any coordination 
committee in a metropolitan area have had complaints about their local 
committee(s) .

Perhaps instead of attempting to start a new / alternative coordination 
group(s), those that feel slighted should run for office within the 
current committees and implement the changes they believe would enhance 
the current methods. Both SCRRBA and TASMA hold elections. No one is 
stopping you or anyone else from running for office.

I'm confident there are things within both committees that could be done 
better / more efficiently. But considering the number of systems they 
each have purview over, I'm not sure what you or anyone could do better 
(and still hold a full time job).

Much of the current discussion of TASMA taking over the 440 band from 
SCRRBA could be stopped permanently if Bob or any of the other TASMA 
board members would state unequivocally that they are not planning, 
discussing, nor thinking of doing so and would not in the future either.

Ed Yoho
W6YJ
(an evil repeater owner for more than forty years)





      

Reply via email to