From wd5ivd@tapr.org Mon Apr 06 23:26:24 1998 Received: from [207.8.125.50] (greg-jones-pc1.customer.jump.net [207.8.125.50]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id XAA07121; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 23:26:20 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 23:26:13 -0500 To: "TAPR APRS SIG", aprsqsy@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: APRS QSY Page Update Life is finally getting a little easier after the accident over Spring Break. I took a little time this evening and updated the APRS QSY pages to reflect all those that submitted information since the last update. Thanks to everyone who completed a survey. The percentages didn't change significantly again this time, which would indicate saturation of the data. I had planned to complete the survey results by this upcoming PSR, but that is not possible under my current schedule. I'll be working on the completed report before the following PSR deadline. http://www.tapr.org/aprsqsy Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd Boren's Laws: (1) When in charge, ponder. (2) When in trouble, delegate. (3) When in doubt, mumble. From cap@cruzio.com Thu Apr 30 01:45:19 1998 Received: from mail.cruzio.com (root@mail.cruzio.com [208.226.92.37]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id BAA13784 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 1998 01:45:17 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cap-s-p90 (sa-208-226-93-69.cruzio.com [208.226.93.69]) by mail.cruzio.com with SMTP id XAA23580; Wed, 29 Apr 1998 23:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980429234507.00855540@mail.cruzio.com> X-Sender: cap@mail.cruzio.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 23:45:07 -0700 To: rwf@bsrg.org, aprsqsy@tapr.org From: Cap Pennell Subject: Re: GATEWAY UPDATE et al In-Reply-To: References: <19980428.155217.11702.0.kd4tqz@juno.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 06:06 PM 4/28/98 -0500, rwf wrote: >Hi Lee- > >I really did read your message very carefully, then I read it again just >now! It basically reassured the SIG that the digis in the SE ARE going to >QSY and that it was mainly a weather and access issue with one RF >interference issue to boot. Well, outside your immediate area there are >*many* more issues than that! Does this mean that Lee's area is not part of the Big Shanty Repeater Group influence area? hi Lee and others are interested in coordinating their operations with the rest of the USA. Many of the digis in the greater SE have already QSY'd. Will the greater Atlanta area become a 5.79 island? The network will be built around whoever is unwilling to work for the long-term good of amateur radio. >The only reason I posted to the SIG was to correct the info that was posted >in the first place. > >I am in communication with Rick and John and the rest of the digi owners >around the South as well- As a matter of fact BOTH of them are staying in >one of my rooms at Dayton, and John the same last year. I'm sure we will >strategize about this more then. Aha, a conspiracy! Beware of infiltrators! hi >I'm sorry you feel you were called down, and I did not intend to do that at >all, but I did feel that signals of compromise are sent concerning the >unified stance of the SE when a user posts data about the *network's* >intent to QSY at all. Compromise is the goal! That's the whole idea behind the QSY. The SE is not unified. Most APRSers in the SE want to be on the same frequency as the rest of the country ASAP. >Please understand that the technical issues with >placing strong terrestrial emitters in or very near the repeater input sub >band are substantial and some are affected more than others. Many of us >will require many $$$ worth of filters in order to make it work at all >*assuming* the commercial radios we are using will even go to the new >frequency. Yeah, yeah, so you keep saying. This is a red herring. These problems are mostly imaginary and a result of a fear of change, of conservatism. The radios, for the most part, will tune at 144.39 just fine. That has been the experience of those that have made the leap. Haven't you been reading the SIG? Those who've QSY'd are saying their apprehension about interference to other systems had not been justified either. >There is NO REASON to rush any QSY when the network is working as designed- >Especially when a non-unified QSY would split it when there is no current >solution to the problem it would cause. There are many valid reasons to QSY now. Your network is already NOT working optimally. You have too much unhappiness in the ranks, too many digis and users trying to break away and join the rest of the USA, too many wondering why your influence area is unable to do what others have found so easy to do once they've committed to try it, too many wondering how only a few can hold off the desire of so many to accept the QSY compromise for the greater good. >I too have done a lot to spread the APRS word not only in the Southeast, >but around the USA as well. Yes, I recall you have lobbied against the QSY in Southern California too. I am not familiar with your efforts regarding the QSY in the other parts of the country. >Bob Bruninga and I even brought APRS to the >1996 Olympics! I am one of the most pro-APRS people you will find and >don't have a discourteous bone in my body, but if you feel you were slammed >(and want to complain to Stan) then fine- but maybe you'd better make sure >you *have been* slammed first. And this is not meant as a slam either, I just hope you'll realize the QSY is well underway (complete in most areas), and your influence is not progressive. Here in California, the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) response is a well known form of shortsightedness. I know the new South can see beyond that. >As I see it, a bit if slightly incorrect information was corrected here. > >The answer you *should* be giving to the "many questions being sent to you" >is that there has been no decision made yet as far as the network goes. We >are evaluating what to do. Are YOU the network? Is your network growing? Not on that old frequency. It will stagnate, shrivel, and shrink until it decides to move beyond "evaluating". What you *should* do is already clear. 73, Cap KE6AFE (former resident of Tullahoma TN, FWIW) > > >Ralph Fowler N4NEQ >rwf@BSRG.org > > > >At 03:52 PM 4/28/98 -0400, you wrote: >> >>I think you had better read my msg again. I in no way was speaking for >>the SE digi assn nor its owners. I was merely offering an answer to the >>many questions that have been sent to me. > -- Cap Pennell Santa Cruz, CA 95062-1002 3658.93N/12200.91W [CM86xx] email: cap@cruzio.com home page: http://members.cruzio.com/~cap packet radio: KE6AFE @ki6eh.#wcca.ca.usa.noam