On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 13:47:16 Nat Hager III wrote: >Simple difference in tactics. You're "everything or nothing"
Dear Nat, this is *not* a matter of 'tactics' or 'everything or nothing'. Please understand and rationalize what's intended with moves like this. The use of a "friendly" inch will ONLY cause trouble. Do you honestly think that making this change will ultimately cause these industries to finally let go of the hideous crap??? If you do, my friend, I'm sorry to say but you're dreaming in technicolor! There can be no doubt about this whatsoever! What this is intended is for these companies to have an "easy traffic" within metric countries, while *still* keeping this idiocy. A "friendly" inch would certainly overcome these countries resistance to allow the sale and use of such products as one of the main reasons for them not to do so is precisely the fact that there is clear incompatibility between ifp systems and metric ones. For instance, 24" modules, which would translate to nice 60 cm pieces, could *fit* nicely within any metric construction framework. But do you really think that they would ***market*** such modules as 60 cm there??? Not in your lifetime!!! , I'm "wiggle >my foot in the back door". Both pushing for the same end goal. >... Yes, we're indeed 'pushing for the same goal' indeed. But I'm afraid you're seriously overlooking the nefarious consequences such changes would actually have on metrication. Please, make no mistake about it, once resistance to the introduction of "new ifp" products is overcome, it won't be long till a **decimal** way of doing things get thrown out the window!!! As for 'wiggl(ing) (our) foot in the back door', I honestly don't see this as contributing to it *at all*, but rather a very clever sneaky way of bringing destruction to decimal thinking and metric-only labeling in metric countries. Marcus >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On >Behalf Of Ma Be >Sent: Wednesday, 2002 November 27 12:27 >To: U.S. Metric Association >Subject: [USMA:23620] Re: metric inch > > >Changing the conversion factor for ifp units to "nice" values like this (25) >is a recipe for disaster for our cause!!! Why? It's actually very simple, >once you make ifp "workable" vis-a-vis the SI system you'll be entranching >its use *definitively*. Once this "obstacle" is overcome companies will see >no more reason to metricate! They'll continue to talk about inches, feet >and the likes **forever**!!! > >Therefore, a resounding **NO** to this suggestion. > >Marcus > >On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 11:20:58 > Nat Hager III wrote: >>Metric inches are quite practical, given the current state of US >conversion. >>Defining the inch as 25.0 mm, it simply becomes a grouping of 25 mm, or a >>quarter of a base 100 mm module. (much like 25 cents is a quarter of the >>base 100 cent module, the dollar). >> >>I was talking with a supplier the other day who was hard ifp. I was >viewing >>his inches as 25 mm modules, he was viewing them as self-contained >>measurement units independent of anything else. >> >>We both were happy. >> >>Nat >> >>PS Teach this in grade school and you Balkanize ifp within 10 years. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf >Of >>kilopascal >>Sent: Wednesday, 2002 November 27 10:21 >>To: U.S. Metric Association >>Subject: [USMA:23615] metric inch >> >> >>2002-11-27 >> >>Check this out: >> >>http://slashdot.org/articles/99/09/30/1437217.shtml >> >>Look for the metric inch. >> >>John >> >> > > >____________________________________________________________ >Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! >Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
