True, but what alternative is there to eliminate the interference other than a change to the uncoordinated system? (especially with a CSQ repeater that is causing harmful interference)
In this case, the addition of CTCSS/CDCSS would resolve it to the satisfaction of the coordinated trustee, and that certainly is the least the uncoordinated repeater can do. Joe M. Kevin Custer wrote: > MCH wrote: >> Coordination is not required, but when one repeater is coordinated, and the >> other is not, >> *the uncoordinated one must resolve the problem*. That's in Part 97. > > I'll pick on Joe here a minute.... > > The rules state that it is *primarily* the responsibility of the > uncoordinated repeater (owner) to resolve the issue. > This means that the problem is NOT solely the responsibility of the > uncoordinated system, but SOME responsibility lies upon the coordinated > system (owner) to help resolve the issue. > > Kevin Custer > List Owner > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1763 - Release Date: 11/2/2008 > 7:08 PM
