RadioReference.com Database Poll - VOTE PLEASE!
- Thread starter blantonl
- Start date
- Status
Lindsay,
I had to vote "maybe", simply because data from my present location has not yet made it into the database, and, being new here, I desparately need it!. What data I do have, I have gleaned from other web sources, but, you have admonished us not to post such purloined data.
It would be nice if there could be a joint effort of all web site operators to pool their data.
Walt
I had to vote "maybe", simply because data from my present location has not yet made it into the database, and, being new here, I desparately need it!. What data I do have, I have gleaned from other web sources, but, you have admonished us not to post such purloined data.
It would be nice if there could be a joint effort of all web site operators to pool their data.
Walt
Walt, what area is that?
godskid
Member
old postings
your site is great.
i would like to see some of the old posts removed.
set a time limit ( a month or two months old) to be removed to
clean up some of the clutter and make room for new posts.
this is just my opinion. i may be wrong.
keep up the good work.
GOD BLESS
your site is great.
i would like to see some of the old posts removed.
set a time limit ( a month or two months old) to be removed to
clean up some of the clutter and make room for new posts.
this is just my opinion. i may be wrong.
keep up the good work.
GOD BLESS
Why have the system delete them? Makes a search much harder!
On your end, go to the bottom of the forum page and tell it how many days back you want to show.
On your end, go to the bottom of the forum page and tell it how many days back you want to show.
Walt, if you are able to collect data from multiple sources, format into your own work, and send to us - that is just fine.wbertram said:
We just don't want people blatently copying and pasting information from web sites. If you use multiple sources to build your own data, then that is just fine.
I'll fix the FCC stuff for Lehigh County, PA so you'll have FCC data to start working with.
Lindsay
DaveH
Member
Re: Database Poll
Lindsay,
I think it is an error to equate free access to the RR database with
recognition to submitters. By this logic, perhaps RR should not ask for
donations because you receive a large amount of free information. I
know this should not be the case because you have invested a great
deal of your own time and money and continue to do so.
In spite of the problems you have outlined, it doesn't seem to be asking
too much for contributors to receive fair recognition for their work. I don't
consider myself particularly egotistical or demanding, but sometimes amidst
the complexity, the simpler things make the difference. It will be interesting
to see how the new crediting system works out, but I'm a bit sceptical.
It's apparent that some people have access to "inside" information, with
such accurately-named talkgroups, sites etc. For the rest of us the path of
collection and verification can be long. I'm a stickler for accuracy and for
the last several months have been cleaning up the trunked listings for my
area, the result of bad submissions that were copied (not by me) from
local sources. For those who originate real data, not just copy it, there
can be a lot of time and effort involved, but we usually do it because we
like doing it.
Regarding people who got into trouble for submitting data and being
found out, sorry, not too much sympathy. I'm all for open information,
but there is a risk to being a submitter. Even without a slip-up through the
database, the source might otherwise be traced back and problems ensue.
Another aspect of collecting conventional data from all over into one huge
database, it will sucked out of local and regional databases where it has been
collected and maintained by people with a geographic sense of community.
With all respect for the admins who work hard at keeping things current,
this sense isn't particularly strong, and I don't see how it could be. So what's
good for RR may not be good for local scanner communities who will now
be looking outwards. Time will tell how this plays out.
I'm not currently sitting on much data that would be of much interest or relevence to
the RR users, that hasn't already been submitted as trunked systems. Regrettably
I no longer feel much motivation towards further submissions to the database, but
thought it important to point out some of the aspects, however unpopular this
might be.
Regards....Dave
Lindsay,
I think it is an error to equate free access to the RR database with
recognition to submitters. By this logic, perhaps RR should not ask for
donations because you receive a large amount of free information. I
know this should not be the case because you have invested a great
deal of your own time and money and continue to do so.
In spite of the problems you have outlined, it doesn't seem to be asking
too much for contributors to receive fair recognition for their work. I don't
consider myself particularly egotistical or demanding, but sometimes amidst
the complexity, the simpler things make the difference. It will be interesting
to see how the new crediting system works out, but I'm a bit sceptical.
It's apparent that some people have access to "inside" information, with
such accurately-named talkgroups, sites etc. For the rest of us the path of
collection and verification can be long. I'm a stickler for accuracy and for
the last several months have been cleaning up the trunked listings for my
area, the result of bad submissions that were copied (not by me) from
local sources. For those who originate real data, not just copy it, there
can be a lot of time and effort involved, but we usually do it because we
like doing it.
Regarding people who got into trouble for submitting data and being
found out, sorry, not too much sympathy. I'm all for open information,
but there is a risk to being a submitter. Even without a slip-up through the
database, the source might otherwise be traced back and problems ensue.
Another aspect of collecting conventional data from all over into one huge
database, it will sucked out of local and regional databases where it has been
collected and maintained by people with a geographic sense of community.
With all respect for the admins who work hard at keeping things current,
this sense isn't particularly strong, and I don't see how it could be. So what's
good for RR may not be good for local scanner communities who will now
be looking outwards. Time will tell how this plays out.
I'm not currently sitting on much data that would be of much interest or relevence to
the RR users, that hasn't already been submitted as trunked systems. Regrettably
I no longer feel much motivation towards further submissions to the database, but
thought it important to point out some of the aspects, however unpopular this
might be.
Regards....Dave
Dave,
You raise some interesting points, many of which I have given serious thought to.
I'll attempt to address (no particular order).
1. I certainly intend to give credit for folks who submit data to this site. I'M thinking something that highlights submitters in a tiered level, with our significant contributors getting "more" recognition than maybe someone who submitted one frequency change. Fair recognition is something I am a strong supporter of, and intend to pursue. However, if the expectation is for me to monetarly reward submitors, then we've strayed into an area that I just don't intend to pursue. If you are skeptical about our plans, then I recommend you make a suggestion on how you feel this could be best handled. I'm open to all suggestions.
2. The geographic sense of community is something that I'm looking very heavily at, and is constantly on my mind. I am very aware that many prefer a more locally run and managed scanner web site, since it provides that localization that scanner listeners crave. As part of the overall architecture planning of the site, I'm investigating ways to better manage this process, such as provide the tools and resources necessary to manage frequency information as a web services application, with the flexibility of possibly local "chapters" that reference the rr database and still keep their local flavor.
The information is common across most, if not all scanner related web sites. What differenciates a local website is not the frequency information, rather, all the "other stuff" like local events, news, procedures etc. If there was a way to combine the two, then that would be the "holy grail" of the scanning community. Think about that - a common, standardized repository and tools, and the local flavor. It could be very powerful.
I'm curious to understand in a bit more detail why you don't feel the motiviation towards further submissions to the database. Are we not headed in a direction that you feel is good? Please let me know.
In any case, thanks for your comments and feedback, this information is very valuable to me in my planning.
Lindsay
You raise some interesting points, many of which I have given serious thought to.
I'll attempt to address (no particular order).
1. I certainly intend to give credit for folks who submit data to this site. I'M thinking something that highlights submitters in a tiered level, with our significant contributors getting "more" recognition than maybe someone who submitted one frequency change. Fair recognition is something I am a strong supporter of, and intend to pursue. However, if the expectation is for me to monetarly reward submitors, then we've strayed into an area that I just don't intend to pursue. If you are skeptical about our plans, then I recommend you make a suggestion on how you feel this could be best handled. I'm open to all suggestions.
2. The geographic sense of community is something that I'm looking very heavily at, and is constantly on my mind. I am very aware that many prefer a more locally run and managed scanner web site, since it provides that localization that scanner listeners crave. As part of the overall architecture planning of the site, I'm investigating ways to better manage this process, such as provide the tools and resources necessary to manage frequency information as a web services application, with the flexibility of possibly local "chapters" that reference the rr database and still keep their local flavor.
The information is common across most, if not all scanner related web sites. What differenciates a local website is not the frequency information, rather, all the "other stuff" like local events, news, procedures etc. If there was a way to combine the two, then that would be the "holy grail" of the scanning community. Think about that - a common, standardized repository and tools, and the local flavor. It could be very powerful.
I'm curious to understand in a bit more detail why you don't feel the motiviation towards further submissions to the database. Are we not headed in a direction that you feel is good? Please let me know.
In any case, thanks for your comments and feedback, this information is very valuable to me in my planning.
Lindsay
unitcharlie
a Kentucky DB Admin...
with apologies....
let me say first: this is a superb site. the assembly of trunked systems far exceeds that of the other, scanner connected, competitors. the addition of conventional info in an accurate and usable form makes this site the one to bookmark. i only hope i have been able to add as much as i have taken from this site....
my maybe vote is not meant to be a downer... i don't have a lot of time to check thru postings and new info so i would love to see newest posts in forums up-top and newest freqs higlighted as in the trunkedradio. perhaps it is just a matter of becoming attuned to the php system of operations...
regarding the new site: the info i have gleaned from this site is more reliable than that from most of the local sites in my area.... i am in the business of needing good info quickly and it is here that i can find it without digging thru the fcc database or trying to sort thru the police calls stuff (which is outdated at publication, i know, but is still a valuable resource)...
recognition for those who contribute is sticky but in some way should become reality. i know how much and what i have contributed to this database, both trunked and conventional. i feel an obligation to add to something i have used...and hope that the admins who must edit and validate my input will trust submissions from me as accurate. as for public recognition, i believe that should be something simple, perhaps a star next to my name in the member listing after a certain level of input. (as i sit here typing this the local fire department is using a new talk group-gotta confirm and verify the users now!) but then the conflict of letting everyone know that i have given this info could create a problem in some quarters... oh well... put a star by my name and make me a trunking master, get me an inside track with the gre folks to field test new scanner technology (i use scanners in a way that is close to "not normal wear-and-tear" in my job....
i would like to see the ability to watch more than ten counties in my r-r... i sit on the north end of a forty-four county area i need to be prepared to monitor, some of the counties i don't visit more than a few times a year but need to keep scanners going for people who travel those roads more frequently... but again, not complaining, the most monitored counties are listed, so that is cool....
most of the stuff i submit is basically a cut-and-paste job from the saved p95 files... i save them as text files and then cut and paste the proper info to the submission form and press the button....
mr blanton, i am very pleased with this site and have told others about it... and, unless you tell me otherwise, will continue to send stuff to the site
let me say first: this is a superb site. the assembly of trunked systems far exceeds that of the other, scanner connected, competitors. the addition of conventional info in an accurate and usable form makes this site the one to bookmark. i only hope i have been able to add as much as i have taken from this site....
my maybe vote is not meant to be a downer... i don't have a lot of time to check thru postings and new info so i would love to see newest posts in forums up-top and newest freqs higlighted as in the trunkedradio. perhaps it is just a matter of becoming attuned to the php system of operations...
regarding the new site: the info i have gleaned from this site is more reliable than that from most of the local sites in my area.... i am in the business of needing good info quickly and it is here that i can find it without digging thru the fcc database or trying to sort thru the police calls stuff (which is outdated at publication, i know, but is still a valuable resource)...
recognition for those who contribute is sticky but in some way should become reality. i know how much and what i have contributed to this database, both trunked and conventional. i feel an obligation to add to something i have used...and hope that the admins who must edit and validate my input will trust submissions from me as accurate. as for public recognition, i believe that should be something simple, perhaps a star next to my name in the member listing after a certain level of input. (as i sit here typing this the local fire department is using a new talk group-gotta confirm and verify the users now!) but then the conflict of letting everyone know that i have given this info could create a problem in some quarters... oh well... put a star by my name and make me a trunking master, get me an inside track with the gre folks to field test new scanner technology (i use scanners in a way that is close to "not normal wear-and-tear" in my job....
i would like to see the ability to watch more than ten counties in my r-r... i sit on the north end of a forty-four county area i need to be prepared to monitor, some of the counties i don't visit more than a few times a year but need to keep scanners going for people who travel those roads more frequently... but again, not complaining, the most monitored counties are listed, so that is cool....
most of the stuff i submit is basically a cut-and-paste job from the saved p95 files... i save them as text files and then cut and paste the proper info to the submission form and press the button....
mr blanton, i am very pleased with this site and have told others about it... and, unless you tell me otherwise, will continue to send stuff to the site
Really love the all in one location. I voted "Maybe, still needs improvement. We have some "old" data that is difficult to get removed . The systems here in Indiana are changing fast. The older freqs andusers are dropping and adding as fast as we can listen over a week-end. Some posts "appear" to be cut and past from some older outdated site. The reference to the FCC Data Base is really good for fixing this. Time should help with this minor irritation as we get more listening time on the posted frequencies.
PanJurekMrJerry
Member
I voted that the Database Needs Improvement. Why? Some of the frequencies listed for L.T.R. just Don't jive with what is listed in the http://www.fcc.gov database. Some are listed as Convetional in the FCC Database but Radio Refeence lists them as Regualr Analog L.T.R. Trunked? Why? Where do the posters get there info from?
Like take for instance where I live, I know thta there are more L.T.R. trunked radio sites then what is listed but if I post them; they get rejected.
Why is this? :?
Like take for instance where I live, I know thta there are more L.T.R. trunked radio sites then what is listed but if I post them; they get rejected.
Why is this? :?
PanJurekMrJerry
Member
See what I do NOT understand is that the frequencies sometimes do NOT jive or the site location does NOT jive. Please explain this to me.
:? :?
:? :?
tglendye
Blue Ridge Mountains, Shenandoah River- VA
This is a great site for what we like to do! There is no other site out there that runs a close second, IMHO. That being said, it still could use some tweaking- and I know that's got to be a constant job.
I don't know if this is something that "we" as contributors need to add when we send the information in, or that moderators need to pick up on better. There are a lot of counties with cities that are not linked together. I know this was hit on in a previous post a little. My feeling is that if you go to visit an area you probably want to monitor the city & county whose area you are in- unless it is a major metro area with too much traffic. It's kind of hard to pick up what county one city is in by looking at the database. It would be nice if each city and county had a link to their database- you wouldn't have to have all of the frequencies/ talkgroups on a single page- just a link to it. I know that when you're not familiar with someone else's geography and probably the way some of the information is presented- it's probably not too much the moderators fault.
JerryNone, I need to hear some specific examples of instances where your submissions were rejected, and where this type of issue is occurring, and where information is inaccurate. Where do you live? I'll go back and review every bit of information your submitted to see what the issue is... I have a complete history.
One thing to keep in mind is that the FCC database is notoriously inaccurate, and many LTR systems are listed as conventional frequencies. To take the FCC database as the gospel is a big mistake to make. Furthermore, many companies pool frequency assignments into LTR trunked systems.
Also, one reason why information might be rejected is to look at your post:
Hmmm.... and I'm not sure why you used Bold Red Letters.
One thing to keep in mind is that the FCC database is notoriously inaccurate, and many LTR systems are listed as conventional frequencies. To take the FCC database as the gospel is a big mistake to make. Furthermore, many companies pool frequency assignments into LTR trunked systems.
Also, one reason why information might be rejected is to look at your post:
Hmmm.... and I'm not sure why you used Bold Red Letters.
mr_hankey
Member
from http://m-w.com
Main Entry: 3jibe
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s): jibed; jib·ing
Etymology: origin unknown
: to be in accord : AGREE
i'm only posting this because i used to make the same mistake...
and that ain't no jive!
Main Entry: 3jibe
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s): jibed; jib·ing
Etymology: origin unknown
: to be in accord : AGREE
i'm only posting this because i used to make the same mistake...
and that ain't no jive!
JerryNone said:
They get the info from listening "first hand" which is a lot more accurate than the FCC records. I would trust what the users post more than the FCC for our purposes. The FCC database should be used mostly for supplemental purposes....
unitcharlie
a Kentucky DB Admin...
with apologies....
jerry... sometimes when i am at the scene of something and see people talking into mics but don't hear things on my scanner i search... sometimes i just search because... i have used my search function to confirm many freqs i have listed on many sheets of typing paper from the pre-p.c. days when police calls was the most up-to-date database around....
jerry... sometimes when i am at the scene of something and see people talking into mics but don't hear things on my scanner i search... sometimes i just search because... i have used my search function to confirm many freqs i have listed on many sheets of typing paper from the pre-p.c. days when police calls was the most up-to-date database around....
PanJurekMrJerry
Member
Alrighty folks maybe I was a bit harsh but all I wanted to know is why this database DOES NOT jive with the FCC database. Also why the sites seem to be different then what is in the FCC database.
I am sorry if I was so harsh. All in all this is an excellent database with just a tad bit of room for a little bit of improvement.
Yes I know tht my spelling is NOT the greastest but then again I am NOT a professional typist.
Also, L.T.R. is just soooooo confusing with the conventional versus
the Trunked listings in the FCC database.
So once again my apologizes forthe BIG BOLD RED LETTERS.
Keep up the great work and thanks for explaining this situation to me.
I hope you all have a great day, great weekend.
Also, if you celebrate it, have a great Easter.
----Jerry :arrow: 8)
I am sorry if I was so harsh. All in all this is an excellent database with just a tad bit of room for a little bit of improvement.
Yes I know tht my spelling is NOT the greastest but then again I am NOT a professional typist.
Also, L.T.R. is just soooooo confusing with the conventional versus
the Trunked listings in the FCC database.
So once again my apologizes forthe BIG BOLD RED LETTERS.
Keep up the great work and thanks for explaining this situation to me.
I hope you all have a great day, great weekend.
Also, if you celebrate it, have a great Easter.
----Jerry :arrow: 8)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
