It's hard work but it is up to us (USMA) to politely, persistently, objectively urge the vendor(s) to adopt a more user-friendly package size. Duncan
-----Original Message----- From: Han Maenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: November 14, 2001 01:48 Subject: [USMA:16172] 454 g is not metric. Was: Re: Re: From footrule >In 'old' metric countries butter is sold in 250 and 500 g packs. >As long as butter is sold in 454 g packs in Canada and other 'new metric' >countries there will be no progress at all. It is simply the continuation of >the old Imperial pack expressed in irrational metric. This is probably one >big reason why people are opposed to SI. They could say '1 lb' in the past, >now they have to say '454 g'. In the end soft metric is no metric. It is >either proof of gross innumeracy or it is used to set up people against the >metric system or to get back at metric users like in this example from last >year: > >From: Dennis Brownridge[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 2000/05/08 08:59
