Heavily edited for length... At 09:32 AM 3 March 2002 -0800, Ma Be wrote: >?? I'm sorry, dear friend, but you seem to still miss the point of my >argument.
Bill could not get through to me on this either, so don't feel too bad! >In other words, unfortunately *due to the prevailing ifp circumstances* >NOT contributing towards a change is actually *in practical terms* taking >action (or inaction!...) to preserve ... ifp. Not taking action to promote metric is NOT the same thing as taking action to preserve the status quo. I absolutely think you are way off base here. The result may be the same, but you are dealing with two entirely different mindsets. If someone wants to take action to preserve colloquial units, that person is beyond our reach and we should not waste any time with them. If someone does not care about measurement systems one way or the other, they are (at least potentially) within our reach and we can and should try to "convert" them. Lumping these two together is counter-productive to our purposes. > >Marcus, do you never deal with people who have limited education? ... > > >Of course I do. But, first things first. I was mostly referring to your >experience in bringing metric to your business, to people who would have >been taught the SI system, therefore, my assumption was that we were >dealing here mostly with the 'educated' part of your employees. I teach the metric system to ALL my employees, from the brightest engineers to the least-educated and least-confident production assembler. Which is why I have created an in-house certification, since the USMA CMS and CAMS are too difficult for the lower level people. >... But I can advance to you that my point will be that *even these >[less-educated] folks* should be helped by telling them that adopting the >SI system would be in their own best interests and that it was actually >far easier to deal with, etc, etc. Of course they are helped. But that does not turn them into active promoters of metric. As I said elsewhere, very few people are going to get too excited about metrication, even when they know the benefits. Measurement is just is not that big of a part of life to most people. >... More educated people having more 'brains' to waste could probably >concoct all sorts of lame arguments not to support the SI. And BTW isn't >this *precisely* what we see from the likes of journalists and >'pseudo-scientists' who have the galls to make a stand against the SI??? ;-) This is true ONLY if you accept that metric is **OBVIOUSLY** better. But, it is NOT obviously better until you understand it! If you have spent your life with colloquial units, and have little knowledge of how the metric system works, then the metric system appears to be more complicated and messier. In other words, I think your slander of these people is not entirely called for. Some clearly will always hate metric regardless of whether they understand it. But, many will come around if we can get them to learn the metric system enough to understand its superiority. >Fine, than what do you make of your sample stats then? Without wanting >this to sound as a criticism I'd say that some important elements of [your >training], such as 'getting through to people', seems to have been missed >in the exercise. Perhaps I have a different goal than you would if you were in my shoes. The goal of my training employees to use metric is to ensure that they understand it well enough to use it reliably and accurately in their jobs. The goal of my training is NOT to turn them into metric cheerleaders, merely to ensure they can use it. However, I am totally confident that achieving my goal ensures they will NOT be on the anti-metric bandwagon should it roll around. And a few (probably engineers) may get on the pro-metric bandwagon in time. > >...Those who "make things happen" (a far, > >far smaller number) are the only ones we need to convert to active > >pro-metricationists. > > >But then what about ifp goons? Why is it that they always seem to be more >organized and to get things done while we seem to fail (DOT's, for >example...)? What kind of people are they, how would you characterize >them? I don't think that these are 'uneducated' bunch! ;-) Yes, some "ifp goons" are well educated, and would qualify as people who "make things happen." And we shouldn't expect to win this fight without an occasional setback. But we ARE going to win, because a lot of educated people who "make things happen" are pro-metric, and we have the better system on our side. > >This is not to say that there have been no regressions in this field. I am > >sure there have, although none come to mind. Overall, though, it is clear > >that electronics manufacturing is metricating. > >... >Then why is it that we still see so much crap coming from these industries >(like wire lengths, specs in ifp, etc)? Patience, patience, patience!!! Jim Elwell
