I re-read my message and see it might be misinterpreted. There are certainly individuals on this list who are doing yeoman work trying to help metricate the States from the bottom up. My reference is to the officially consituted USMA, which is in a position to further the other end of the spectrum of the metrication effort (i.e. from the top down). Moreover, while individuals even in governmental and industry groups can be effective, it seems to me that the USMA organization is needed to at least provide significant lobbying effort, funding, etc. when it comes to managing the process of getting the FPLA amended (in the same manner that any other lobbying group goes about getting legislation passed or amended). I very much do not want to slight (but rather stand up and applaud) the effort that individuals on this list (and elsewhere) have done to promote metrication in the USA. Sincerely, Ezra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Easy solution. The US needs to allow for metric only labelling. Since the US is >clearly in the minority (a minority of one to be exact) then the US adoption of >metric only labelling is the clear solution to the increased costs of dual packaging. >As metric only labelling appears to be the trend I don't see where the 2009-12-31 >deadline should be a problem for US companies... unless of course they ignore the >metric labelling issue until 2009-12-30
