Well said Anthony, that's how I've always done things and will continue to
do things. I'm willing to find work around if need be for anything if/when I
can.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Vece" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 1:17 PM
Subject: Re: PL Required for Repeater Coordination


> Hi Dan;
>
> A blind ham is no different then a ham who is sighted.
>
> A ham who is sighted will also need to scan for PL tones and, if the
> repeater does not pass the pl tone then that will be that much less use
> that
> the repeater owner's repeater will get.
>
> I mean let's be practical here.
>
> If we want to be treated with the same respect that everyone else is
> treated
> with then, I think we need to stop classifying ourselves and just go with
> the flow.
>
> Their are always work arounds and, no matter what segment of the
> population
> we are in, we will always need to make adjustments.
>
> 73 De Anthony W2AJV
> [log in to unmask]
> ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "dan kysor" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 12:31 PM
> Subject: Re: PL Required for Repeater Coordination
>
>
>> well now days with the plethera of repeaters in high density populations,
>> its necessary, unfortunately.
>> For example, when coordinating my 440 repeater, we discovered that a high
>> level frequency on a frequency i was trying for was so loud that even a
>> pl
>> wouldn't have solved the problem and the repeater was 200 miles away but
>> it
>> is on a 4000 foot peak.
>> on the other hand, 90 mile frequency sharring is very common and really
>> only can be accomplished by pl.  i personally wish and long for no pl
>> because for a blind person, its much easier to tune around the band
>> especially if your traveling but reality is reality.
>> finally, saying all of this, coordinating councils are typically not very
>> strong when push comes to shove.
>> the fcc in many instances, disregards these councils with respect to
>> disputes.  I will always defer to a council up to a point.
>> dan w. kysor n6ikc
>> At 12:21 PM 8/28/04, Mike Duke, K5XU wrote:
>>>This is from this week's ARRL Letter.
>>>
>>>What do you think of it?
>>>
>>>K5XU
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>==>REPEATER COORDINATOR OKAYS MANDATORY REPEATER TONE POLICY
>>>
>>>The Southeast Repeater Association (SERA) Board of Directors has approved
>>>an "all tone, all the time" policy for the repeaters SERA coordinates.
>>>SERA provides voluntary frequency coordination for amateur repeaters in
>>>Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi
>>>and parts of Virginia and West Virginia. The Board okayed a motion to
>>>amend its coordination policy and guidelines to require CTCSS or DCS
>>>receive and transmit tones on all new FM voice repeaters. Existing voice
>>>repeaters will have until July 1, 2006, to comply. The SERA Repeater
>>>Journal reported the move in its August issue. Repeater Journal Editor
>>>Gary Pearce, KN4AQ, said a need to relieve interference complaints led to
>>>the Board's decision.
>>>
>>>"The point is to stop the ongoing complaints and skirmishes between
>>>co-channel neighbors running carrier-access repeaters," Pearce explained.
>>>"The vote was unanimous, but SERA recognizes that tone isn't universally
>>>popular nor is it a cure-all. And it causes new problems, particularly
>>>for
>>>travelers."
>>>
>>>South Carolina ARRL member Laurie Sansbury Jr, KV4C, would agree with
>>>Pearce on that score. He also has taken issue with SERA's new policy and
>>>with Pearce's Repeater Journal "SquelchTale" editorial, in which Pearce
>>>said he had "little sympathy for the ham whose radio doesn't have a tone
>>>encoder" and "Radios are cheap today."
>>>
>>>"Not for the senior on a fixed income they're not," Sansbury retorted in
>>>an e-mail copied to ARRL. "Not for a teenager--the future of ham
>>>radio--they're not."
>>>
>>>ARRL South Carolina Technical Coordinator Marc Tarplee, N4UFP, said he
>>>believes an important consideration of SERA's tone policy is its
>>>potential
>>>effect on emergency operations. "The Amateur Radio Service is expected to
>>>provide emergency communications," Tarplee said. "How does broad CTCSS
>>>implementation enhance or hinder our ability to deliver those
>>>communications?"
>>>
>>>SERA has no plans to automatically decoordinate repeaters that continue
>>>to
>>>operate without tones, but "SERA would not entertain an interference
>>>complaint from the owner of any repeater who chooses to remain carrier
>>>access," the Repeater Journal said. If a carrier-access repeater owner
>>>getting co-channel interference complains to the FCC, SERA would tell the
>>>Commission that the complaining repeater's owner was opting to operate
>>>outside the conditions of coordination. "SERA would expect that to be
>>>interpreted as a 'no,'" the Repeater Journal report said.
>>>
>>>"If a repeater owner wants to complain about interference, they'll have
>>>to
>>>incorporate tone first," Pearce said.
>>>
>>>
>>>Mike Duke, K5XU
>>>American Council of Blind Radio Amateurs
>>
>