I don't know how to measure the influence of communications in metric
units, but it seems obvious that we should measure the frequency we
suffer a loss by not being fully metricated in "hurts".
Jim
Bill Potts wrote:
Pat:
That seems to be a variant of one that a number of people were
attributing (wrongly) to John Cleese. It would seem to be from someone
mimicking John Cleese's style. If you add Snopes to your Google search
argument, you'll probably get the full run-down on it.
I'm not sure that something like that is going to make any difference to
the acceptance of metrication. I'll be happy, of course, if it does in
fact make a positive difference. However, (1) I'm not holding my breath,
and (2) I'm not sure how we'd measure its influence.
Bill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Potts
WFP Consulting <http://wfpconsulting.com/>
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org <http://metric1.org/> [SI Navigator]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*On Behalf Of *Pat Naughtin
*Sent:* Saturday, October 11, 2008 20:17
*To:* U.S. Metric Association
*Subject:* [USMA:41842] The Queen of England
Dear All,
Many people send this message to me assuming that I will be
interested in the metrication reference.
About a year ago I might have received this message (as a joke)
about once a month, but recently the frequency has increased and now
I can receive this as often as four times in a day.
I don't know what the change in frequency means, but when I searched
Google for the phrase, "roundabouts and metrication" I got 9730 hits
many of them from the USA. Maybe people are starting to be able to
consider words like 'metric' and 'metrication' without instant recoil.
A Message from the Queen
--
James R. Frysinger
632 Stony Point Mountain Road
Doyle, TN 38559-3030
(H) 931.657.3107
(C) 931.212.0267
