I like your thinking, and it pretty much reflects my point of view. This brings to mind an amateur on another list who has a linked system in a large city, maybe Chicago, I don't remember; at any rate, it is an area with no available pairs at all. This amateur, with three linked repeaters, is very proud of the fact that his *private* system has only three users. This, to me, is wrong and selfish in many ways. Richard <http://www.n7tgb.net/> www.n7tgb.net "The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." -Margaret Thatcher
_____ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alan Rabin Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 1:57 PM To: Repeater-Builder Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Closed Repeaters Please excuse Me. I feel compelled to make this one comment. Consider for a moment the fact that when one employs a repeater, they are effectively sitting on two Amateur frequencies within a given geographic area. If I were to claim two Amateur frequencies let's say for instance on the HF band, and tell others they cannot use them what would most of us say? It seems to me that repeater coodination in the Amateur band is more of a courtesy than anything else. I see no reason that if and when a given repeater in not in use that like any other frequency or split in this case, that someone else can't use it as long as there is no interference to another station in operation. I know that may upset some, but we need to take responsibility for our operations as Amateurs. It's not that I don't believe in closed repeaters or wish to chastise those who do, but by default I believe they may be right on this one. I haven't even touched on the fact that repeater usage is down dramatically in most areas in the country. In a time like this we need activity on our systems we have in place to attract new folks in the hobby, not idle machines with restrictions. Just my 2 cents. Enjoy,, -Alan
