myGMRS Network Shutting Down August 28th, 2024

[mixdup]

On 8/24/2024 at 10:21 AM, AdmiralCochrane said:

Not linked, but someone here reported that there was a locality where one licensee had 5 or 6 GMRS repeater channels tied up.  There are such people and if it is allowed, somebody somewhere WILL do it.

Ham doesn't have that problem partly because ham has repeater coordination.  No such coordination scheme exists for GMRS nor can under current FCC regs.

Oh this one is easy, there are 24 repeaters part of the "North Georgia GMRS" network covering every repeater channel twice, some four times over, covering literally the entire northern half of Georgia and part of Eastern Tennessee

I get that it's fun to do this and have a network you can get your voice over 700 square miles without having to learn radio theory or whatever is on the technician class exam, but the network is mostly 10 guys who live within 15 miles of each other ragchewing all day. Except this weekend, they're going to do radio relay for the cops at a Jeep event and that will be linked into the entire network, so that's a really good efficient use of all those channels

There should be a middle ground between no linked repeaters and what some of these guys are doing. It would absolutely make sense to be able to link two repeaters on two sides of a mountain for example. But, do we really need the ability to order a radio off Amazon, key up, and tie up 8 channels between Knoxville and Orlando? 

But, my favorite part of that network is how it's essentially just a slush fund for the clique at the top. It's a non-profit that has no reports to the IRS, charges hundreds of dollars a year, and doesn't own any of the equipment. When the FCC rules say you can only use funds for paid repeaters for the repeaters themselves, they have a suspiciously well produced YouTube channel and well funded video studios

[WRYS709]

10 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

Let me make this simple enough, that even you will understand it:

YES - There are those that regular people refer to as "sad hams" .. this is fact, it cannot be disputed.

If this fact makes you sad, and/or if you do not understand the difference between a 'sad ham', and a regular, helpful, normal-ham, then YOU ARE A SAD HAM, and YOU are who all of us normal people make fun of.  and if that makes you even more sad, then, good, you deserve it. (and yes, even if you dont have a H.A.M. radio license, you can still have all the personality defects making you a latent sad-H.A.M.) 

As for these facts spreading out in other venues: thank you for noticing! Please continue to spread the word!

If you are referring to something else, then please clarify, because as everyone knows, I love to answer stupid questions.

I am just the "reporter" delivering the news that if you (and your minions) insult Hams, you shouldn't be surprised when they go to the FCC and do not support Repeater Interlinking for GMRS.

That being said, you seem to want to punish me,  the reporter, for delivering that news and that "style" of discourse does not lead to a very positive climate for continued interchange of ideas. So, no, I won't be clarifying this issue for you, because it is clear you goal is not clarification.

Last time I checked, I never asked you any questions in this thread. You are confusing me with one of your YouTube subscribers...

[WRYS709]

11 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

 

...

[GreggInFL]

10 hours ago, mixdup said:

There should be a middle ground between no linked repeaters and what some of these guys are doing. It would absolutely make sense to be able to link two repeaters on two sides of a mountain for example.

Ah, great example.  I don't have a dog in this fight (couldn't link two repeaters if my life depended on it), but it seems like the FCC could score a lot of points finding a sweet spot.

[Davichko5650]

On 8/24/2024 at 10:49 PM, OffRoaderX said:

 What matters is how many complaints [related to GMRS] does the FCCs ACT ON... and, based on the FCCs public enforcement database that anyone can search through, the answer is, virtually 0 ..

 

And as the enforcement Atty from the FCC explained on the "Chinese Buffet" (sounds like a Guns n Roses album)  video, the complaints they receive are not part of the public record unless they are included in an NAL or other action actually posted to the Enforcement Database.  So anyone can claim a specious (sorry Randy, not "spurious") amount of complaints have been filed w/o having to back up the claims!

[MaxHeadroom]

19 hours ago, gatekeep said:

Cool, nice response. I'm fairly certain none of your responses in this entire thread actually, clearly, articulate your argument/position on the matter in any form.

13 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

If you are referring to something else, then please clarify, because as everyone knows, I love to answer stupid questions.

What about real questions? Some of us are still waiting.

[WRUE951]

3 hours ago, Davichko5650 said:

And as the enforcement Atty from the FCC explained on the "Chinese Buffet" (sounds like a Guns n Roses album)  video, the complaints they receive are not part of the public record unless they are included in an NAL or other action actually posted to the Enforcement Database.  So anyone can claim a specious (sorry Randy, not "spurious") amount of complaints have been filed w/o having to back up the claims!

Randy is not smart enough to realize that 

[WRUE951]

4 hours ago, WRYS709 said:

...

that's exactly what Randy (eee) said...  

[rdunajewski]

Alright, I think this topic has run its course...