0001727880H80
| Joined: | Sat, Apr 4th 1998, 00:00 | Roles: | N/A | Moderates: | N/A |
Latest Topics
| Topic | Created | Posts | Views | Last Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net Check-in Validity | Sep 23rd 2015, 05:52 | 4 | 7,958 | on 3/11/15 |
Latest Posts
| Topic | Author | Posted On |
|---|---|---|
| Net Check-in Validity | 0001727880H80 | on 23/9/15 |
| Our local ham club is currently involved in a debate. Our weekly, 2-meter check-ins have, in the past, included others "relaying" some participants who are not on the net. Most NCS's accept relays from an outlying position who can hear some on the net but cannot transmit sufficiently for NCS to hear him or her. Further, most NCS's allow people in the same location to check in for others present in the same location. Problems arise when others, having something else to do or somewhere else to go attempt to be checked in. This is usually done by asking NCS in advance, or by having someone else respond in the affirmative when their (the missing individual's) call sign or name is called. Argument for this practice: New hams are rather nervous about getting on the air. We are trying to encourage them and build up their confidence. By not letting them engage in the "checked-in-no-matter-what-or-where" strategy, they will feel shunned , un-wanted, and will be discouraged from further ventures into Amateur Radio. Argument against this practice: This denies the integrity of people, policy, and protocol - nets should be opportunities to practice correct operating procedures; check-in data can help in disaster planning and in areas where weaknesses need to be addressed. I am sorry for the length of this inquiry. My purpose, trying to be un-biased, is to obtain a consensus from more experienced individuals and then share it with our members. Thank you! |
||
