Darrick: You have just provided yourself with a perfect example (your own) of what argumentum ad hominem actually is. Never have I suggested that it's a waste of time to thank companies for going metric. I have, however, suggested that it's waste of time to send messages to the people at the BOTTOM of an organization AFTER it has become evident that their only job is to send out canned replies. Such messages don't reach those who make the decisions. I guess you missed my message (USMA:12401) about writing, via ordinary mail, to the president and/or vice president of marketing of such companies. I will decide what I think, Darrick. And I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth or presume, in even the remotest way, to know what my thoughts are. You are quite obviously quite inept when it comes to reading minds. And you just as obviously know nothing whatsoever about me. Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Darrick Priest > Sent: May 04, 2001 19:39 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [USMA:12642] Re: Bill Roland again > > > ..and Bill Potts thinks that it's a waste of time to thank companies that > are supporting the metric system with metric first or metric only labels. > Do you now understand, Bill, why it's important! There are > people out there > who would love to undo all the work the USMA has accomplished. > > Hey Bill! Go to you bathroom and kitchen right now, take note of metric > first and/or metric only labels, and countermand this other Bill with a > "Thank you" to all those companies that are actually doing what > we want and > have asked them to do. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: kilopascal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 3:32 PM > Subject: [USMA:12638] Re: Bill Roland again > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, 2001-05-03 10:53 > > Subject: [USMA:12608] Bill Roland again > > > > > > > > > > I got this from the BWMA Battle Boards. > > > Han > > > > > > > > > Difference in distance measurements > > > April 28 2001 at 11:45 PM Bill Roland > > > > > Liters are also nowhere to be found in the gasoline industry, > all fuel is > > in gallons. I > > > have suggested to Coca-Cola that they convert the liter bottle to > quarts, > > but > > > haven't heard back. I think it would be in Coke's best interest to do > > something > > > different than Pepsi, it would certainly get them more publicity. > Anyway, > > > that's all I've got for now. If you ever have any questions for an > > American, > > > send me an e-mail. Thanks. > > > > > > Bill Roland > > > > > > > > > Respond to this message > > > > > > Author Reply > > > BWMA > > > > > > Soft drinks downsizing May 2 2001, 5:56 PM > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > With reference to Coca Cola and Pepsi, you might want to look at the > Great > > > Metric Rip-Off page. There is a photograph of a US 12 floz Pepsi can > > alongside > > > a metric 330ml can. Needless to say, the metric can is > smaller. American > > > consumers need to be made aware that metric conversion will lead to > > smaller > > > quantities being sold for the same price as it has in > Britain, so be on > > your > > > guard against metric downsizing by Pepsi and Cola. > > > > > > > > > > Something is very nonsensical here. This Bill, wants coke to DOWNSIZE > from > > a litre size to a quart size (946 mL). But, the BWMA response makes no > > mention of that bit of rip-off. But, when a metric product is > down-sized, > > it is a grievous sin. No wonder the governments and industries ignore > them. > > They speak with forked tongue. > > > > > > Also, note that the BWMA is using the AMERICAN dating methods. > Seems they > > only scream about cultural destruction when and where it suits them. > > > > > > John > > > > > > > >
