But I didn't say "explicit," Karl; I said "emphatic." There's a world of
difference.
Their reply shows that they didn't pay much attention to Nick's reference to
metric packaging. It seems to have gone completely over the head of the
person who wrote the response.
Moreover, Nick agrees with that assessment.
Bill Potts, CMS
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Karl G. Ruling
> Sent: April 18, 2001 12:02
> To: U.S. Metric Association
> Subject: [USMA:12303] Re: sugar bags
>
>
> At 11:59 4/18/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >The only problem, Nick, is that they thought you were
> complimenting them on
> >the product, rather than on the rational SI unit of measure used for the
> >package.
> >
> >I think that, when we send complimentary letters or email
> messages to those
> >who use SI measurements, we need to be quite emphatic about the
> reason for
> >the compliments.
>
>
> He wrote: "I love your new metric packaging." How much more explicit can
> one get?
> There was no praise for the sugar itself, only for "the new 2 kg pack."
>
> I'm sure that for a sugar manufacturer, the packaging is an integral part
> of the product. It's awfully hard to distinguish one brand of sugar from
> another except by the packaging. It's all looks and tastes the same when
> you open the bag.
>
>
