Re: Definition of Subscriber?

["R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ok, I'm not that familiar with the equipment in the station, and it's
capabilities. Perhaps that is the reason why they don't seem to care, or at
least don't make any kind of issue about it...

RHC

"Russell Brill" <russwbrill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:BNl1f.7543$zQ3.583@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> My CS won't respond to AC Fail signals if they're in Storm Mode... The low
> priority signals are left in the cue and dealt with at a later time when
> things settle down... As far as blocking the receivers is concerned, my CS
> has lots of phone lines and MLR-2000 receivers to handle heavy traffic
> periods... They currently monitor around 15,000 to 20,000 accounts, but
> their system can accommodate up to 100,000 accounts.......
>
> "R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:PLqdnScUuvbvQdjeRVn-vQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Yes, another good reason! I'm sure there are a few more as well.
>>
>> I have to wonder though about the wholesale sending of AC failures to the
>> station which seems to be the default mode that a lot of installers /
>> alarmcos use. Surely doing this only serves to block the receivers during
>> major power failures to any real alarm signals that might be coming
>> through. Or perhaps the stations have a way to filter all these useless
>> signals to leave their receivers clear ? Either way, it still seems like
>> a lot of useless traffic for nothing...
>>
>> RHC
>>
>>
>> "JW" <golf4nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:BQk1f.621$Ue7.235@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> "R.H.Campbell" <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:ItCdnTm6L7jyW9jeRVn-qg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Ok, those have got to be the ONLY reasons I've heard that make any
>>>> sense to
>>>> me...
>>>>
>>>> RHC
>>>
>>>
>>> We have a lot of systems in vacation homes - they want to know if the
>>> power goes out so they can have someone check the premises.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>