On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 09:05:35 Jim Elwell wrote: ... >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. > Well... Yes and no. Please remember the fundamental principle I shared with you. I'm glad you agreed that the result is the same, and THAT is what is VERY troublesome and why the principle exists for a reason, my friend. *If* you know you're supposed to do the right thing and does not, you're just as guilty (sorry...). Please, remember, hell is full of people with 'good intentions', as they say... ;-)
>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. Possibly true. However, we should not shy away from doing the right thing because we may ruffle some feathers, please see how your automotive industry has been handling this issue! ;-) 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. > Agreed, of course. We should try to reach as many potentially listening ears out there as possible. Good point. >Lumping these two together is counter-productive to our purposes. > ? I don't think I was 'lumping' them together exactly, but stressing the principle of inaction as producing the same result. ... >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. > Wonderful. However, my concern and observation stand. If, despite your educational campaign, you still see people 'scared' of the SI system, this should be seen as an indication that there might be some elements missing in that effort, that's all (just food for thought and a humble call for potential revision/improvement of your product, and not criticism of your invaluable contribution in your company for our cause). ... >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. > True, of course, but I don't think it should be much to expect that these guys should at least get the message that SI is not any "monster" for people to be scared of or (worse) not see why they should bother learning it! ... >This is true ONLY if you accept that metric is **OBVIOUSLY** better. But, >it is NOT obviously better until you understand it! Precisely! That's why it's *critical* that one does this! Correct teaching must also impart the ability for people to understand what's being taught! If they don't you actually failed as a teacher! I know that because that's what I've been doing for a living lately. True, teaching is also an art, but one should not forget the fundamentals. 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. > Then perhaps the key/secret here is 'little knowledge', as you put it. Perhaps people should be much more exposed to the SI than by your training sessions somehow (again, please don't take this as criticism, but as an honest humble attempt to help you increase the effectiveness of your metrication campaigns inside your organization). >In other words, I think your slander of these people is not entirely called >for. ??? I'm sorry, but where was my 'slander', Jim? I honestly don't recall having 'slandered' anyone! You are clearly misinterpreting me. All I was doing was trying to make sense of your sample stats. If you understand my rationale right (or better) you'll see that a point that I was trying to make was that if good many people are not "getting" it, may be not a fault of their own! Therefore, how can I be "slandering" them? > Some clearly will always hate metric regardless of whether they >understand it. If there is such 'hatred', then we must understand where it comes from! "Know your enemy". "The best way to conquer/beat the enemy is to make him a friend"... I'm not necessarily advocating that we waste our breath on these guys, but that at least we learn and understand what is it that turns them so much against our cause. That's one of the reasons I've been fighting so much this silly excuse of cultural crap. If these guys feel that metric represents an anihilation or assault attempt at their cultural values, then it's our duty to dispell such myths and fears, just to give you an example of what I mean. > But, many will come around if we can get them to learn the >metric system enough to understand its superiority. > No argument here. ... >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. > Of course, a very sensible justification. However, I can't see that these "goals" should be "mutually exclusive", Jim. I still sustain that they could go hand-in-hand and be fostered more cooperatively and effectively. I don't mean 'cheerleading', as you put it, as a "goal", but rather the fostering of a more *positive* attitude among people in general! >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. > Hooray and amen to that, if that happens. :-) ... >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. > Debatable, Jim. Having the better system is no guarantee of final success, unfortunately. Please remember the classic classroom case of beta versus VHS! Better is not enough. In order for us to be successful at this campaign we must ALSO be in guard against the actions of the "enemy"! A typical case has been the inaction concerning the DOTs fiasco!!! ... >>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!!! > Sorry, Jim, mine has been running out, and for a few years already... :-( In any case, this should take us more than just being patient, IMHO. Take care, my friend. Marcus Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
