[aprssig] Why Not "Gate in Vicinity" (phones)

[Eric Lorenz K9LGE]

Tate:

On 12/27/2011 11:11 PM, KA7O wrote:
> Yes, I think you may be right. You do appear to be, at some level, 
> mis-informed as to the purpose of Amateur Radio. However, I don't 
> think it's your fault - it's a common symptom these days. And easy 
> enough to come by in our modern consumerist society. The Amateur 
> Service is called a service - but it is not something that anyone with 
> a call sign is subscribed to. It is not a 'service' that is due 
> anyone. There are no Service Level Agreements.
I never said there were Tate. And no, as I have served in ARES, SKYWARN, 
Emergency Management, and participated in/directed Amateur Teams in PS 
events since I was licensed in 2004...I think I understand the purpose 
of Amateur Radio.
>
> As hams, we participate in the Amateur Service - it doesn't serve us.
>
> You're haranguing of Pete is inappropriate and frankly, rather 
> immature. He is not saying anything that many others have not been 
> saying for years. And is to be applauded for taking a stance. He's 
> held true to his standards and beliefs for the betterment of APRS for 
> many years. And no - I don't always agree with him.
You have a right to your opinion. I will only admit to stooping down to 
his level in my response to him. However, I believe that that inital 
statements to me were just as 'haranguing', insulting and demeaning. He 
is welcome to his stance...just as I am welcome to mine. If you think I 
am wrong, so be it.
>
> I've run an APRS I-gate and server since I was licensed back in the 
> mid 90s. There is no way I would allow arbitrary internet users - 
> essentially - 'open' access to my I-gate just because they also appear 
> to have a call sign.
>
> If someone - for whatever reason - is limited to a smartphone only 
> device, they are more than welcome to send a message and participate 
> as may be fit. I also have a smartphone and a few APRS-IS only 
> devices. Visitors are welcome! In fact - in some areas, APRS-IS only 
> devices may be the dominate participants. So be it. Depending on the 
> situation, they may even be more appropriate. However, even if we use 
> our callsigns and appropriate passcodes - that is NOT ham radio - 
> regardless of the use of the APRS protocol.
Then what is it?
> And you, Eric, are showing a rather un-hamlike attitude that actually 
> is harmful to the Amateur Community. Is your last name, by chance 
> "Cartman"? (Sorry, that was a bit of a cheap shot - but does 
> characterize your tantrum) If you can not accept a consensus decision 
> made by the community at large, you have bigger issues to deal with 
> than simply your participation in the Amateur Service or APRS.
If we have differing opinions on what and how the Amateur service should 
be used and moved forward, fine. And no, It isn't. (Pot calling the 
kettle black?) You call it a tantrum, I call it standing up to 
statements and behavior some might call 'a bully'. And what is this 
'consensus' decision you speak of? It would appear from the discussion 
here that there is in no way a 'consensus' as far as how smartphone APRS 
programs fit into the APRS RF network and Ham Radio.
>
> Maybe your needs would be better 'served' by a Part 90 radio system. I 
> believe some of my friends working NE of your QTH would be quite happy 
> to sell you some very effective kit. As well as meet any Service Level 
> Agreements you may require.
I stand by my statements. If you wish to disagree with them, that is 
your right.
>
> Tate, KA7O
>
> On 12/27/2011 09:16 PM, Eric Lorenz K9LGE wrote:
>> I think I am done with this discussion for awhile, as apparently I am
>> totally misinformed on the purpose of Amateur Radio. Since Mr. Loveall
>> has established himself as the supreme authority of what is and is not
>> Ham Radio, and has taken it upon himself to question the license or
>> mental understanding of anyone who disagrees with him, there is no
>> further point in...well, trying to make a point. Though I would
>> recommend that you then stop playing with that D-Star stuff...isn't that
>> getting too close to Ham Radio minus RF?
>>
>> For the record, I would love to get more involved in area of Ham Radio
>> like this...but it is those with attitudes like AE5PL that make me just
>> say 'this is so not worth it'. This is supposed to be a fun hobby to
>> explore and extend what we've learned in the past with what the future
>> holds. Not be a wet blanket over anything that doesn't meet one's
>> criteria for what is and isn't allowed by the hobby.
>>
>> Eric K9LGE
>> (a licensed Amateur Radio operator since 2004)
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig


-- 
Eric Lorenz
Communications Trailer Coordinator
American Red Cross-Chicagoland Region
Disaster Services Technology

Co-Lead, Routes/Communications/Safety
Amaerican Diabetes Association
Tour de Cure/Chicago 2012
630-430-2421 cell