Don't be an idiot

[WRKC935]

On 8/24/2022 at 8:04 PM, KAF6045 said:

, but methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) ).

Or as my chemical spill response instructor and CERT instructor called it Methyl Ethel Bad Stuff.

It's funny how the things that can kill you in one specific state are ok to posses in 49 other states.

BTW, how are you handling the fact you can't charge you government mandated electric car while you have rolling blackouts?  I wonder if the blackouts effect the folks that vote for liberals and the conservative voters equally. 

[MichaelLAX]

34 minutes ago, WRKC935 said:

It's funny how the things that can kill you in one specific state are ok to posses in 49 other states.

BTW, how are you handling the fact you can't charge you government mandated electric car while you have rolling blackouts?  I wonder if the blackouts effect the folks that vote for liberals and the conservative voters equally. 

It can cause cancer in the other 49 states as well!

NO ONE said you can't charge an EV during the recent Flex Alerts in California; you were advised to do so when electricity is cheapest: after 10pm!... which is when most cost efficient EV owners charge their EVs anyway...

AND the Flex-Alerts worked: NOT ONE rolling blackout occurred in California: the only blackouts were equipment and/or communication failures due to the excessive heat.

What's the title of this thread again? DON'T BE AN IDIOT!

Flex Alert Ends Without Rolling Blackouts

[WRKC935]

22 minutes ago, MichaelLAX said:

It can cause cancer in the other 49 states as well!

NO ONE said you can't charge an EV during the recent Flex Alerts in California; you were advised to do so when electricity is cheapest: after 10pm!... which is when most cost efficient EV owners charge their EVs anyway...

AND the Flex-Alerts worked: NOT ONE rolling blackout occurred in California: the only blackouts were equipment and/or communication failures due to the excessive heat.

What's the title of this thread again? DON'T BE AN IDIOT!

Flex Alert Ends Without Rolling Blackouts

Well golly Gee.... it gets hot here too, and we don't have these issues with flex alerts or any of that stupidity.  Can't say we have ever had a MANDATE to conserve energy here. 

And as far as cancer causing materials.  Yep some stuff causes cancer.  It's only regulated there, because state governments in other places expect their populace to be smart enough to not get over exposed to them.  One one state feels like their residents are too stupid to understand that and create stuff like prop 65 to regulate it.  Then again, interacting with some from that state, I can see why they would feel that way about it.

[MichaelLAX]

22 minutes ago, WRKC935 said:

Well golly Gee.... it gets hot here too, and we don't have these issues with flex alerts or any of that stupidity.  Can't say we have ever had a MANDATE to conserve energy here. 

For a guy who has no patience about those Newbies who don't understand why a 50 Watt radio does not actually output 50 watts; you'd think you would research and understand the FACTS behind why California has Flex-Alerts (which BTW are NOT mandates) and why Ohio doesn't...

36 minutes ago, WRKC935 said:

OMG is this REALLY a topic of discussion...

[My 50w Radio Doesn't Make 50w. Why?]

 

[WRKC935]

On 6/11/2022 at 10:36 AM, OffRoaderX said:

This is ideology is a result of the constant barrage of ham radio operators acting like snobs, idiots, and whatever (take your pick) in online forums every day seemingly doing their best to chase away newcomers to the hobby.  And yes, GMRS users also do this, but strangely, many of them also have ham callsigns listed on their forum signatures.

God, I just found this by accident, and couldn't agree MORE.  I posted earlier today on eHam about this very thing.  Ham's seem to WANT to piss off all comers that are new to the hobby to the point they toss their equipment in a closet, and allow their license to expire in ten years, never really getting involved with the hobby because they came across this mentality and figured it wasn't worth the effort to remain in the hobby.

[Lscott]

1 hour ago, WRKC935 said:

God, I just found this by accident, and couldn't agree MORE.  I posted earlier today on eHam about this very thing.  Ham's seem to WANT to piss off all comers that are new to the hobby to the point they toss their equipment in a closet, and allow their license to expire in ten years, never really getting involved with the hobby because they came across this mentality and figured it wasn't worth the effort to remain in the hobby.

What does piss off people are those that treat the rules as “suggestions” with no concern for possible enforcement actions, or where they prove inconvenient when they want to do something that’s prohibited. There are several on these forums who think that way. Unfortunately they set a bad example for the newbies.

[KAF6045]

On 8/24/2022 at 4:44 PM, tep182 said:

People might be more inclined to be good neighbors if they were told about "spurious emissions" instead of "part 95e".  

Not really related -- but I'd bet 50% of those hearing the phrase "spurious emissions" will believe it is a reference to "wet dreams".

  

4 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

It's funny how the things that can kill you in one specific state are ok to posses in 49 other states.

I've not found MEK in any hardware/paint store in my current locale (Grand Rapids vicinity). Tri-Sodium Phosphate for use in pressure washers has also disappeared from said facilities.

[WRKC935]

On 9/11/2022 at 7:27 PM, Lscott said:

What does piss off people are those that treat the rules as “suggestions” with no concern for possible enforcement actions, or where they prove inconvenient when they want to do something that’s prohibited. There are several on these forums who think that way. Unfortunately they set a bad example for the newbies.

Why do I get the feeling that you are referring to the linking discussion here? And specifically me and something I have said here or elsewhere, it's just that reply just seems strange.  Unless you are referring to my comments on another board about amplifiers that have the ability to exceed the power levels set in the US regulations for ham radio.  If that is the case, remember, that is there and is about HAM radio, it is NOT here about GMRS radio and the two should be kept separate. 

 

[Lscott]

9 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

Why do I get the feeling that you are referring to the linking discussion here? And specifically me and something I have said here or elsewhere, it's just that reply just seems strange.  Unless you are referring to my comments on another board about amplifiers that have the ability to exceed the power levels set in the US regulations for ham radio.  If that is the case, remember, that is there and is about HAM radio, it is NOT here about GMRS radio and the two should be kept separate. 

 

I think if you go through present and past threads on various topics it will be obvious who those people are. Two are on my block list because I don’t want to waste my time getting posting notifications when they post their garbage.

The linking discussion pertains to GMRS not Ham Radio. The question about it’s legality is murky since the rules are a bit ambiguous so it’s a gray area. Until the FCC clears up the language there is the possibility they will unambiguously make it clear one way or the other, maybe flatly prohibiting it by name.

Other rules are rather straight forward, however some posters encourage operating practices, equipment modifications (software - hardware -programming), that leave little doubt it violates the rules. Demands for “proof” of enforcement actions, and lack of any, is not permission to ignore them because it’s “really” ok. Essentially the poster(s) are looking for acknowledgment from others their actions are OK to excuse what they know is wrong. I’m not playing that stupid game.

[WRKC935]

16 hours ago, Lscott said:

I think if you go through present and past threads on various topics it will be obvious who those people are. Two are on my block list because I don’t want to waste my time getting posting notifications when they post their garbage.

The linking discussion pertains to GMRS not Ham Radio. The question about it’s legality is murky since the rules are a bit ambiguous so it’s a gray area. Until the FCC clears up the language there is the possibility they will unambiguously make it clear one way or the other, maybe flatly prohibiting it by name.

Other rules are rather straight forward, however some posters encourage operating practices, equipment modifications (software - hardware -programming), that leave little doubt it violates the rules. Demands for “proof” of enforcement actions, and lack of any, is not permission to ignore them because it’s “really” ok. Essentially the poster(s) are looking for acknowledgment from others their actions are OK to excuse what they know is wrong. I’m not playing that stupid game.

I don't disagree that things that are blatantly against the rules should NOT be encouraged.  Equipment modifications are a no brainer for crap you don't do.

And yes, the linking seems murky, but the linking seems to get people on the air.  Which gets people to buy radios, get licenses and renew licenses.  An issue the ham community is fighting with above 50Mhz currently and one they seem to be loosing.  This leaves people that wanted to TALK on the radio (what a concept) bored and lacking enjoyment of the ham radio hobby.  I realize that talking on the radio is PART of the ham radio hobby, but it's the most important part.  Because at the end of the day when you have built some cool new antenna, or radio accessory, or even possibly a radio you want to test it and show off your accomplishment.  And if there is no one to talk to about it, whats the point.  Part of feeling accomplishment is recognition.  Again, take that away and for many there is no longer a point.

 

And while I agree with the statement that lack of enforcement is not a license to forget the rules and turn things into a free for all.  I would NEVER encourage someone to do stuff like operate DMR or P25 on GMRS.  But I sure would like to do it myself,,,, legally.  Which of course isn't possible at this time.

 

 

[Lscott]

15 hours ago, WRKC935 said:

I don't disagree that things that are blatantly against the rules should NOT be encouraged.  Equipment modifications are a no brainer for crap you don't do.

And yes, the linking seems murky, but the linking seems to get people on the air.  Which gets people to buy radios, get licenses and renew licenses.  An issue the ham community is fighting with above 50Mhz currently and one they seem to be loosing.  This leaves people that wanted to TALK on the radio (what a concept) bored and lacking enjoyment of the ham radio hobby.  I realize that talking on the radio is PART of the ham radio hobby, but it's the most important part.  Because at the end of the day when you have built some cool new antenna, or radio accessory, or even possibly a radio you want to test it and show off your accomplishment.  And if there is no one to talk to about it, whats the point.  Part of feeling accomplishment is recognition.  Again, take that away and for many there is no longer a point.

 

And while I agree with the statement that lack of enforcement is not a license to forget the rules and turn things into a free for all.  I would NEVER encourage someone to do stuff like operate DMR or P25 on GMRS.  But I sure would like to do it myself,,,, legally.  Which of course isn't possible at this time.

 

 

I think linked repeaters serve a purpose, however I just wished the rules were more clear cut. Setting up a system is risky since the FCC could pull the plug on the idea resulting in a waste of time, money and hardware. So long as people understand that they can make their choices accordingly.

Then there is the digital voice mode issue. More posters are commenting about hearing increasing digital voice activity in some areas. The FCC will have to do something sooner or later. Either get serious and enforce the rules, or change them to legalize the practice. Personally I’m in favor of the idea if done in a manner that’s not disruptive to the majority of existing FM only operators. I started a thread a while back about possible rules changes. It got derailed by a discussion of an issue that had little to do with the topic. In any case I did attach  a paper outlining an idea to one of my posts.

[WRKC935]

Yeah, I like the idea of the linked repeaters.  I seen it a bit differently in that if you put up a Linked repeater and there are no other repeaters in that coverage area, you should put up a stand alone repeater as well.

I put up two stand alone repeaters first.  Those being the 725 that was the first repeater on the tower.  That one is under the call sign of the tower owner and he uses it to communicate with his family and some other folks and we use it for tower work.

Then came the 675 repeater. I got licensed and had another repeater so I fired it up and put it on the air.

Then I found this place, and the Midwest GMRS group and facebook page.  And that looked REALLY appealing to me so up went repeater number 3, on the same tower and no same antenna system. 

My bigger concern is they will limit height on repeaters and I will need to drop my transmit antenna down 130 feet to 50 feet or something horrible like that. 

I really don't want to see linking go away, but if it does, I will just unlink the controller and and pull the Ethernet connection off it.  It would suck doing it, but it wouldn't destroy me.   I may decide to switch one of the repeaters to ham but outside that, it's not gonna be as big of a deal to me as it would be to others.

 

[Adamdaj]

On 6/10/2022 at 12:59 PM, kmcdonaugh said:

https://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-proposes-record-34-000-fine-for-alleged-interference-and-unauthorized-transmissions-during-idaho

Idaho man being fined $34k for transmitting on Rescue and Fire emergency freqs during an actual emergency. Don't be that guy, stick to your approved, licensed frequencies, and definitely don't transmit on unauthorized frequencies during a friggin emergency.

This individual has to be stupid, didn't he realize he may have put lives in jepardy. Now, I can't say that I haven't  tread on to other bands that I have no business on, but I have never and will never mess around where I'm not authorized, Especially regards to Public Safety Systems.

[WRXN668]

On 6/11/2022 at 3:02 PM, gortex2 said:

Your right not all hams do stupid stuff but many do over and over. Its worse now than ever. I had a HAM last week tell me he doesn't need a GMRS license because he just got him ham license. As of late many getting that license dont even know there own rules. The advent of CCR doesn't help. I have been a ham for 25 years as well as a commercial operator and in Public Safety. You have no idea the amount of folks I have met over the years that had no idea about rules or regulations. In the SAR world the biggest issues we have with radios are the hams who mod there radio to use on SAR frequencies. So yes I guess I've not had the please to deal with alot of smart hams over the years.

If your interactions with hams are generally limited to their freebanding then likely you're only interacting with the subset of hams that are willing to freeband.  This would be confirmation-bias.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's significant overlap between licensed amateur radio operators freebanding and 'whackers', the wannabes that, once they have a license to operate a radio, end up buying an old Crown Vic or a cargo van, painting "REACT Team" or "Emergency Communications" on it.  This sort likes to assert that they have some kind of authority, whether they're actually associated with the organization or not, and whether SAR or public safety officials want them there or not.

Freebanders stand out because their behavior stands out, and whackers may be attempting to justify their unauthorized transmissions based on the the clauses about operating on frequencies one isn't licensed for during emergencies, disregarding that the rules are supposed to allow that only when other forms of communication are not available.  Regardless, this isn't the majority.  This is a very noisy group that stands out due to the high-profile nature of what they're doing.

Regardless, this is not a majority of hams.  In my experience the sin that hams are most guilty of is navel-gazing, using ham radio to talk about ham radio, rather than using ham radio simply as a medium to communicate about other things.  The phenomenon is similar to so many silver-screen-era musicals about making a show or a musical, the novelty wears off quickly.