<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div>And this is why.. we have people operating repeaters without coordination in this state.</div><div><br></div><div>If we cant protect our frequency pairs via the FRC and the ARRL doesnt want to get involved... I guess everything inevitability breaks down, and we are told to just accept it.</div><div><br></div><div>Why do we encourage younger generations to partake in the wonderful world of ham radio.</div><div><br></div><div>Just wow.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757" dir="auto">Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.</div></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><!-- originalMessage --><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: David Krauss <nx4y@verizon.net> </div><div>Date: 11/11/16 12:00 AM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Florida Repeater Council Discussion <frc-info@lists.keekles.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: [FRC] Possible issues with FL repeater coordination </div><div><br></div></div>The issue is resolved. do we want to continue to argue or move on, folks ? it's not like this is a presidential election or something :)<br><br><br><br>Sent from an iPhone 6<br><br>> On Nov 10, 2016, at 11:57 PM, Bryan Fields <Bryan@bryanfields.net> wrote:<br>> <br>>> On 11/10/16 11:32 PM, kg4ugk wrote:<br>>> Was this board and the FRC made aware that you in fact helped spread the<br>>> leaked database? Was the ARRL brought in to provide support?<br>> <br>> The ARRL was made aware of these issues. They have chosen to stay out of it.<br>> <br>>> I personally, dont like the idea of Bryan being apart of this committee.<br>> <br>> I don't like that idea either.<br>> <br>>> We<br>>> are all not just hams. We live other lives, have other jobs. We should be<br>>> able to personally choose if we want information available and our home<br>>> phone numbers and addresses being immediately exposed with a quick google<br>>> search of your own name now, everyone on this list should in some way feel<br>>> violated. <br>> <br>> You have all this information listed in the FCC database.<br>> <br>>> Theres a reason even QRZ requires registration and log ins prior<br>>> to the address you want listed on there viewable to other HAMs, not the<br>>> entire free world. <br>> <br>> Again, FCC database has this. I'm not sure why QRZ doesn't show it, perhaps<br>> to encourage account creation as they are an advertisement platform.<br>> <br>>> I don't want every person I hand my business card to be<br>>> able to call me at home or stop by my house because I didnt call them back<br>>> before close of day, as I'd imagine some of you may feel. As soon as this<br>>> database was made viewable, and he facilitated the distribution of said<br>>> hacked database, he officially made himself an accomplice to the original<br>>> crime. <br>> <br>> There was no crime and this is publicly available information. The FRC cannot<br>> promise to keep your information private legally.<br>> <br>> At the end of the day more information is on your voter registration than<br>> what's in some repeater records.<br>> <br>>> I do like the idea of the PDC, but as to the interactions and<br>>> confrontational approach he has, would not be conducive to the survival of<br>>> the FRC. Yes he has made some valid points, and a plan was put in motion,<br>>> great.<br>> <br>> Then get involved. What do you want to see change?<br>> <br>> <br>>> Bryan himself previously stated that it takes the FRC too long to provide<br>>> updates, and we've been waiting quietly for his update.. his first order of<br>>> being appointed to a newly formed committee is to state he hasnt had much<br>>> time to devote to FRC issues. It usually rolls downhill. <br>> <br>> I've been waiting for replies to emails and things I've sent out. We've had<br>> no movement yet. As you said "We are all not just hams. We live other lives,<br>> have other jobs."<br>> <br>>> Theres a reason<br>>> that a chain of command exists. I am now CC'ing the NFCC board members, as<br>>> the ARRL should probably provide additional support, after all.. they are<br>>> the ones who govern whos ultimately the coordinating body for each state,<br>>> but after the extensive actions taken on Bryans side. When we are already<br>>> vunerable to hacks in the computer day and age, Bryan in fact is going to<br>>> set us back and harm the FL ham community. I am also going to talk to the<br>>> local hams in broward county that have a bigger reach into our local<br>>> repeater owners than I do.<br>> <br>> The ARRL does not want to be involved, I've contacted them.<br>> <br>>> IMPORTANT.To appoint someone to a committee to stop his legal attempts was<br>>> not a wise decision, contacting the FCC or ARRL for assistance in this<br>>> dispute should help resolve this.<br>> <br>> To make a contract contingent on a party forgoing legal representation is not<br>> legal. I only was asking for a members roster and the results of the past<br>> four elections from the board. The fact they refused to provide this to a<br>> member is disgusting. At that point, what option does one have other than to<br>> retain counsel?<br>> -- <br>> Bryan Fields<br>> <br>> 727-409-1194 - Voice<br>> http://bryanfields.net<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> FRC-Info mailing list<br>> FRC-Info@lists.keekles.org<br>> http://lists.keekles.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frc-info<br>> Unsubscribe: <mailto:frc-info-unsubscribe@lists.keekles.org><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>FRC-Info mailing list<br>FRC-Info@lists.keekles.org<br>http://lists.keekles.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frc-info<br>Unsubscribe: <mailto:frc-info-unsubscribe@lists.keekles.org><br></body></html>