Data integrity

AtomicTaco · #1 (**permalink**) 10-15-2012, 2:27 AM

King County Metro Transit Trunking System, Seattle, Washington - Scanner Frequencies

Who here on RadioReference "personally gathered and confirmed to be accurate" the data? Because it looks like it was just copied from here.

I find it hard to believe that someone personally verified all those, especially since 28054-28064 are inoperable links to the 800 system, and 28063 rarely gets used even on the 800 system.

im800mhz · #2 (**permalink**) 10-15-2012, 1:09 PM

According to the log page it looks like lowboy654. King County Metro Transit Trunking System, Seattle, Washington - Scanner Frequencies

AtomicTaco · #3 (**permalink**) 10-15-2012, 1:14 PM

I doubt you can pick up the system in Stanwood.

im800mhz · #4 (**permalink**) 10-15-2012, 8:15 PM

True. Looks like he is the database guy. Maybe someone gave it to him to enter it.

icom1020 · #5 (**permalink**) 10-15-2012, 10:26 PM

He shore is keyping queit about it

kd7kdc · #6 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 4:37 PM

Well Technoweenie I mean Atomic Taco you just confirmed those for us with your rant and Nick said they were spot on so there is really no doubt they are valid. I'm sure there would be heads being cut off if clients found out that companies that they hired to organize and build out/maintain radio systems were giving out there private frequencies to the public on the Internet.
Don't play innocent, you intercept group didn't stumble on those talkgroups by pure chance.

AtomicTaco · #7 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 6:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

Well Technoweenie I mean Atomic Taco

Not following. I don't drive a Vic and I don't own any firearms.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

you just confirmed those for us with your rant

The poster said they need to be confirmed, and there hasn't been 100% confirmation yet. I'm guessing that Nick found it to be accurate for the talkgroups that have been active. And since many of them have seen no use, they are unconfirmed, which means by your policy should not be listed.

For most of the ones listed in the 28054-28064 range, there are many similarly tagged talkgroups on the KC/VC system. But if I park a radio on those talkgroups on the KC/VC system, I don't see any corresponding activity on this system, so apparently they're invalid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

and Nick said they were spot on so there is really no doubt they are valid.

See above. And, did Nick submit them here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

I'm sure there would be heads being cut off if clients found out that companies that they hired to organize and build out/maintain radio systems were giving out there private frequencies to the public on the Internet.

Huh? Private frequencies? Nobody on Intercept even knows who posted that list. They're a one hit wonder and revealed no personal information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

Don't play innocent, you intercept group didn't stumble on those talkgroups by pure chance.

Nobody on Intercept solicited them. Nor is anyone on Intercept reselling the data for profit.

Wilrobnson · #8 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 6:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

Well Technoweenie I mean Atomic Taco you just confirmed those for us with your rant and Nick said they were spot on so there is really no doubt they are valid. I'm sure there would be heads being cut off if clients found out that companies that they hired to organize and build out/maintain radio systems were giving out there private frequencies to the public on the Internet.
Don't play innocent, you intercept group didn't stumble on those talkgroups by pure chance.

Wow, I remember my first drunk post.

Did you really just confuse Atomic Taco for Technoweenie? You only missed by about 300 pounds.

Where was it that AT stated the "intercept group" stumbled upon "those talkgroups by pure chance"?

Go back to doing cut-rate installs, Steve.

Wilrobnson · #9 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 6:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtomicTaco

I don't own any firearms.

Why not?

kd7kdc · #10 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 6:53 PM

Yes I must have the two fellows, My apologies.

kd7kdc · #11 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 6:57 PM

Atomic Taco seems to know a lot about this particular system

AtomicTaco · #12 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

Atomic Taco seems to know a lot about this particular system

Unlike the database admins for this state, Atomic Taco lives within the coverage area for this particular system.

By contrast, something is a lot more than nothing.

jrw14493 · #13 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kd7kdc

I'm sure there would be heads being cut off if clients found out that companies that they hired to organize and build out/maintain radio systems were giving out there private frequencies to the public on the Internet.

We're not the one posting test MACC TGID's.

kd7kdc · #14 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:29 PM

Must have confused the two fellows.

kd7kdc · #15 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:31 PM

You or some other intercept staff will eventually so don't even go there.

kd7kdc · #16 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:33 PM

You know I didn't have any privileged information about the talkgroups, I was installing unprogrammed radios.

AtomicTaco · #17 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:41 PM

Back to the issue at hand, can you explain why Ken added info that was just copied off Intercept?

kd7kdc · #18 (**permalink**) 10-16-2012, 7:49 PM

No I really can't explain I'm not Ken and I haven't talked to him for a few months so I don't know.
What I really don't understand is why some people think they have the god given ownership right to something they don't even own.