Stephen Humphreys
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 11:49:49 -0800
If you could be as polite as the other members of this forum it would be a bonus (See J.Steele's response to me regarding being anti-customary but not a nutcase). Until then I'm going to ignore your 'contributions' if that's ok? (I'm not sure why you consider yourself an expert in legislation and laws of the UK - presumably including my involvement, despite me clearly explaining the security aspect and why I cannot supply examples publicly)
From: stevo.da...@btinternet.com
To: usma@colostate.edu
Subject: [USMA:46876] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 19:33:32 +0000
"You'll have to ask Mr Steele whether he was being
anti-imperial or pro-metric."
I was referring to your comment,
so it would be rather a waste of time asking Mr Steel about a comment you made,
wouldn't it?
"Weights and measures at work - I am currently involved
with a big security cleared project which involves many (legal) instances
of weights and measures most of which is based upon choice (we even have a
conversion lookup table"
I notice that you haven't named a single example.
That's because businesses, such as traders in foodstuffs are bound by
legislation preventing them from picking and choosing the measures they
use. On our roads, it is predominately imperial; in our shops and
supermarkets, it is predominately metric. It is either one or the
other.....you cannot have both! There may be exceptions but, if there are,
I'm certainly not aware of them.
"Finally - if you check - I followed up John (Steele's)
I-19 post with a shared positive opinion - with a congrats."
Yes you did - but I was referring to the comments you
made after that, wasn't I?
"Yes there are people who dislike people (and
even send poisonous
emails)
Yes indeed, there most certainly is, isn't
there, Mr Humphrey's? There most certainly is........hmmmm!
----- Original Message -----
From:
Stephen
Humphreys
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 9:52
PM
Subject: [USMA:46870] RE: Replacement of
metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
A couple of things are worth responding to.
1) You'll have to ask Mr Steele whether he was being anti-imperial or
pro-metric.
2) Weights and measures at work - I am currently involved with a big
security cleared project which involves many (legal) instances of weights
and measures most of which is based upon choice (we even have a conversion
lookup table). I'm sorry but I cannot discuss the details of the
contract due to the unfortunate existence of a couple of weirdos who like to
track me. I will mention more in private correspondence but not
publicly.
Finally - if you check - I followed up John (Steele's) I-19 post with a
shared positive opinion - with a congrats. All this anti- stuff would
carry weight (insert pun) if I disliked members of this forum and they
disliked me. I do not - and I have even met up with USMA list forum
members in 'real life' for a friendly chat over a 'pint' (sorry!). Yes
there are people who dislike people (and even send poisonous emails) because
of a measurement system but to be honest they're 'off the scale' and have far
deeper issues than even simply going up to things and measuring them!
:-)
From: stevo.da...@btinternet.com
To: usma@colostate.edu
Subject:
[USMA:46869] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona)
deferred
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 20:52:10 +0000
"
"Stephen, you don't have to be 'anti' the opposite to what you are 'pro-'
to, if that makes sense.
In fact that position (IMHO) is more honourable, realistic and mature.
And it makes the argument less personal - again all IMHO."
I'm just confused by your bizarre notion that JM Steel was wrong to
appear anti-imperial because he would prefer that these metric signs to
be kept...and it looks like they may be (hooray!!). He is
a metric advocate. He is a member of a metric discussion board.
Why should he be worried about appearing anti-imperial when it is the
main function of the discussion board is to promote metric? People on
here are not exactly going to talk about imperial in glowing terms, are
they?
"I have my preferences but I'm definitely not anti-metric. I find
it difficult to envisage being against how something is measured.
In fact I think we are in an enviable position of being able to choose
from two well known systems in the UK (yes - I know that's going to invoke
the
'mess' thing!)."
Yes...it does invoke the "mess" thing, because that's what our system is
in...certainly in regard to weights & measures because of previous
governments lacking a backbone and failing to introduce a coherent system
of metric measurement across the board. By the way, in regards to
weights & measures in business, there is NO choice. All
are bound by W&M legislation, whether the system is metric OR
imperial.
"In fact I think we are in an enviable position of being able to choose
from two well known systems in the UK"
I don't...I find it a complete pain, actually. It is, of course, a
free country (allegedly) and people are free to use what weights &
measures they like but, as I said earlier, businesses and local authorities
can't....they are bound by legislation, making your notion of choice a
misnomer.
"Obviously if I am denied the choice then I must use whatever someone
else has has decided is 'best for me'. That's a position that - in the
main - I wholly dislike."
OK....don't pay your taxes; don't wear a seat belt in your car; openly
smoke in a pub; park on double yellow lines! My point is, there is a
welter of legislation that denies us supposed "free choice". Weights
& measures legislation is there to prevent the traders "free choice" of
ripping me off blind!
"So I guess I am pro-imperial, pro-choice and pro-metric
in that order of personal importance."
Well, we largely do not
have any choice in what currency we spend in the UK, but I doubt it bothers
anybody. If the UK government stuck to its guns and introduced
metrication across the board, NO exceptions, in a years time, I'd think
you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who actually gives a damn. Most of
this "patriotic" wish to keep hold of our "historic" weights & measures is
largely bunkum, quite frankly. How many people are aware of rods, chains
and pecks? How many know how many yards in a mile or even ounces in
a pound? Not that many!
Choice in things that actually matter, Steve. I hardly think feet
& inches or pounds & ounces matter all that much.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Stephen
Humphreys
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:49
PM
Subject: [USMA:46856] RE: Replacement
of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
Stephen, you don't have to be 'anti' the opposite to what you
are 'pro-' to, if that makes sense.
In fact that position (IMHO) is more honourable, realistic and mature.
And it makes the argument less personal - again all IMHO.
I have my preferences but I'm definitely not anti-metric. I find
it difficult to envisage being against how something is measured.
In fact I think we are in an enviable position of being able to choose
from two well known systems in the UK (yes - I know that's going to invoke
the 'mess' thing!).
I choose imperial or metric depending on the job or situation in
question. I would never use fractions of inches (perhaps except half)
and instead use whole millimetres which to me is preferable. That
particular choice is pro-metric. It's not anti-Imperial, I simply
think there's a better way in that instance.
Obviously if I am denied the choice then I must use whatever someone
else has has decided is 'best for me'. That's a position that - in the
main - I wholly dislike.
The obvious reply by yourself, Stephen, is something like 'come off it
- you're anti-metric' or something similar to that. Of course you're
free to have your opinion but it's an odd position to take to claim you
would know my opinion despite what I truthfully say. I hope you don't do
this though.
So I guess I am pro-imperial, pro-choice and pro-metric in that order
of personal importance.
From: stevo.da...@btinternet.com
To: usma@colostate.edu
Subject:
[USMA:46841] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona)
deferred
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:57:32 +0000
"As a footnote - I always think you should concentrate
on trade reasons for going metric.
With roadsigns and the like it looks more 'anti-imperial' than
'pro-metric' and many people will just see it as some people's personal
beef
being played out at a national level - if that makes any sense. Sort
of "I hate those mile signs - make them say all 'k' & 'm' on them"
versus "we've lost an order because the customer required metric - make
them
show metric". That sort of thing."
But its entirely OK to be 'anti-metric'? Also, isn't being
'anti-imperial' to a large extent the main purpose of this discussion
board,
ie, to promote the usage of metric instead?
----- Original Message -----
From:
Stephen Humphreys
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 7:09
PM
Subject: [USMA:46827] RE: Replacement
of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
As a footnote - I always think you should concentrate on
trade reasons for going metric.
With roadsigns and the like it looks more 'anti-imperial' than
'pro-metric' and many people will just see it as some people's personal
beef being played out at a national level - if that makes any sense.
Sort of "I hate those mile signs - make them say all 'k' & 'm'
on them" versus "we've lost an order because the customer required metric
- make them show metric". That sort of thing.
However I will always say that you can usually tell how metric a
country is by what's on their road/public signs (ie it's part of the
language)
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 04:19:44 -0800
From:
jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net
Subject: [USMA:46824] RE: Replacement of
metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
To: usma@colostate.edu
Gridlock works!
I am happy, but I also realize it is insignificant in the bigger
picture. Even having or not having metric signage defined in the
MUTCD is insignificant in the absence of a time-bounded plan to actually
GO metric. Congress destroyed the plan and legislated against any
new plan circa 1995, with regards to roads.
From: Stephen Humphreys
<barkatf...@hotmail.com>
To: U.S. Metric Association
<usma@colostate.edu>
Sent: Thu, March 4, 2010 6:23:40
AM
Subject: [USMA:46823]
RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
I suspect you're quite happy about that - I would have
thought ;-)
Despite my normal position regarding this
subject I actually feel happy for you on this
occassion! Congrats!
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 16:20:05 -0800
From:
jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net
Subject: [USMA:46815] Replacement of metric
signs on I-19 (Arizona) deferred
To: usma@colostate.edu
Due to the lack of a plan, there is no plan. Since they
couldn't decide exactly how to do it, they are not going to do it at
all.
Metric sign replacement on I-19 has been indefinitiely postponed, and
the funds
committed to another project.
http://www.azstarnet.com/news/local/article_d7dec8f6-26f5-11df-b567-001cc4c03286.html
Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell
us now
We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell
us now
We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us
now
We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us
now
_________________________________________________________________
Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/