"You'll have to ask Mr Steele whether he was being anti-imperial or pro-metric."

I was referring to your comment, so it would be rather a waste of time asking 
Mr Steel about a comment you made, wouldn't it?

"Weights and measures at work - I am currently involved with a big security 
cleared project which involves many (legal) instances of weights and measures 
most of which is based upon choice (we even have a conversion lookup table"

I notice that you haven't named a single example.  That's because businesses, 
such as traders in foodstuffs are bound by legislation preventing them from 
picking and choosing the measures they use.  On our roads, it is predominately 
imperial; in our shops and supermarkets, it is predominately metric.  It is 
either one or the other.....you cannot have both!  There may be exceptions but, 
if there are, I'm certainly not aware of them.

"Finally - if you check - I followed up John (Steele's) I-19 post with a shared 
positive opinion - with a congrats."

Yes you did - but I was referring to the comments you made after that, wasn't I?

"Yes there are people who dislike people (and even send poisonous emails)  

Yes indeed, there most certainly is, isn't there, Mr Humphrey's?  There most 
certainly is........hmmmm!
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stephen Humphreys 
  To: U.S. Metric Association 
  Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 9:52 PM
  Subject: [USMA:46870] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred


  A couple of things are worth responding to.


  1) You'll have to ask Mr Steele whether he was being anti-imperial or 
pro-metric.
  2) Weights and measures at work - I am currently involved with a big security 
cleared project which involves many (legal) instances of weights and measures 
most of which is based upon choice (we even have a conversion lookup table).  
I'm sorry but I cannot discuss the details of the contract due to the 
unfortunate existence of a couple of weirdos who like to track me.  I will 
mention more in private correspondence but not publicly.


  Finally - if you check - I followed up John (Steele's) I-19 post with a 
shared positive opinion - with a congrats.  All this anti- stuff would carry 
weight (insert pun) if I disliked members of this forum and they disliked me.  
I do not - and I have even met up with USMA list forum members in 'real life' 
for a friendly chat over a 'pint' (sorry!).  Yes there are people who dislike 
people (and even send poisonous emails) because of a measurement system but to 
be honest they're 'off the scale' and have far deeper issues than even simply 
going up to things and measuring them! :-) 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: [email protected]
  To: [email protected]
  Subject: [USMA:46869] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred
  Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 20:52:10 +0000


  " 
  "Stephen, you don't have to be 'anti' the opposite to what you are 'pro-' to, 
if that makes sense. 
  In fact that position (IMHO) is more honourable, realistic and mature.  And 
it makes the argument less personal - again all IMHO."

  I'm just confused by your bizarre notion that JM Steel was wrong to appear 
anti-imperial because he would prefer that these metric signs to be kept...and 
it looks like they may be (hooray!!).  He is a metric advocate.  He is a member 
of a metric discussion board.  Why should he be worried about appearing 
anti-imperial when it is the main function of the discussion board is to 
promote metric?  People on here are not exactly going to talk about imperial in 
glowing terms, are they?

  "I have my preferences but I'm definitely not anti-metric.  I find it 
difficult to envisage being against how something is measured.
  In fact I think we are in an enviable position of being able to choose from 
two well known systems in the UK (yes - I know that's going to invoke the 
'mess' thing!)."

  Yes...it does invoke the "mess" thing, because that's what our system is 
in...certainly in regard to weights & measures because of previous governments 
lacking a backbone and failing to introduce a coherent system of metric 
measurement across the board.  By the way, in regards to weights & measures in 
business, there is NO choice.  All are bound by W&M legislation, whether the 
system is metric OR imperial.

  "In fact I think we are in an enviable position of being able to choose from 
two well known systems in the UK"

  I don't...I find it a complete pain, actually.  It is, of course, a free 
country (allegedly) and people are free to use what weights & measures they 
like but, as I said earlier, businesses and local authorities can't....they are 
bound by legislation, making your notion of choice a misnomer.

  "Obviously if I am denied the choice then I must use whatever someone else 
has has decided is 'best for me'.  That's a position that - in the main - I 
wholly dislike."

  OK....don't pay your taxes; don't wear a seat belt in your car; openly smoke 
in a pub; park on double yellow lines!  My point is, there is a welter of 
legislation that denies us supposed "free choice".  Weights & measures 
legislation is there to prevent the traders "free choice" of ripping me off 
blind! 

  "So I guess I am pro-imperial, pro-choice and pro-metric in that order of 
personal importance."

   Well, we largely do not have any choice in what currency we spend in the UK, 
but I doubt it bothers anybody.  If the UK government stuck to its guns and 
introduced metrication across the board, NO exceptions, in a years time, I'd 
think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who actually gives a damn.  Most of 
this "patriotic" wish to keep hold of our "historic" weights & measures is 
largely bunkum, quite frankly.  How many people are aware of rods, chains and 
pecks?  How many know how many yards in a mile or even ounces in a pound?  Not 
that many!

  Choice in things that actually matter, Steve.  I hardly think feet & inches 
or pounds & ounces matter all that much.
   

  ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Stephen Humphreys 
    To: U.S. Metric Association 
    Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:49 PM
    Subject: [USMA:46856] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred


    Stephen, you don't have to be 'anti' the opposite to what you are 'pro-' 
to, if that makes sense. 
    In fact that position (IMHO) is more honourable, realistic and mature.  And 
it makes the argument less personal - again all IMHO.


    I have my preferences but I'm definitely not anti-metric.  I find it 
difficult to envisage being against how something is measured.
    In fact I think we are in an enviable position of being able to choose from 
two well known systems in the UK (yes - I know that's going to invoke the 
'mess' thing!).

    I choose imperial or metric depending on the job or situation in question.  
I would never use fractions of inches (perhaps except half) and instead use 
whole millimetres which to me is preferable.  That particular choice is 
pro-metric.  It's not anti-Imperial, I simply think there's a better way in 
that instance.


    Obviously if I am denied the choice then I must use whatever someone else 
has has decided is 'best for me'.  That's a position that - in the main - I 
wholly dislike.


    The obvious reply by yourself, Stephen, is something like 'come off it - 
you're anti-metric' or something similar to that.  Of course you're free to 
have your opinion but it's an odd position to take to claim you would know my 
opinion despite what I truthfully say. I hope you don't do this though.


    So I guess I am pro-imperial, pro-choice and pro-metric in that order of 
personal importance.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: [email protected]
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: [USMA:46841] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred
    Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:57:32 +0000


    "As a footnote - I always think you should concentrate on trade reasons for 
going metric. 
    With roadsigns and the like it looks more 'anti-imperial' than 'pro-metric' 
and many people will just see it as some people's personal beef being played 
out at a national level - if that makes any sense.  Sort of "I hate those mile 
signs - make them say all 'k' & 'm' on them" versus "we've lost an order 
because the customer required metric - make them show metric".   That sort of 
thing."

    But its entirely OK to be 'anti-metric'?  Also, isn't being 'anti-imperial' 
to a large extent the main purpose of this discussion board, ie, to promote the 
usage of metric instead?


      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Stephen Humphreys 
      To: U.S. Metric Association 
      Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 7:09 PM
      Subject: [USMA:46827] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred


      As a footnote - I always think you should concentrate on trade reasons 
for going metric. 
      With roadsigns and the like it looks more 'anti-imperial' than 
'pro-metric' and many people will just see it as some people's personal beef 
being played out at a national level - if that makes any sense.  Sort of "I 
hate those mile signs - make them say all 'k' & 'm' on them" versus "we've lost 
an order because the customer required metric - make them show metric".   That 
sort of thing.


      However I will always say that you can usually tell how metric a country 
is by what's on their road/public signs (ie it's part of the language)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 04:19:44 -0800
      From: [email protected]
      Subject: [USMA:46824] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred
      To: [email protected]


      Gridlock works!

      I am happy, but I also realize it is insignificant in the bigger picture. 
 Even having or not having metric signage defined in the MUTCD is insignificant 
in the absence of a time-bounded plan to actually GO metric.  Congress 
destroyed the plan and legislated against any new plan circa 1995, with regards 
to roads.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      From: Stephen Humphreys <[email protected]>
      To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
      Sent: Thu, March 4, 2010 6:23:40 AM
      Subject: [USMA:46823] RE: Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred

      I suspect you're quite happy about that - I would have thought ;-)
       
      Despite my normal position regarding this subject I actually feel happy 
for you on this occassion!  Congrats! 
       

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 16:20:05 -0800
      From: [email protected]
      Subject: [USMA:46815] Replacement of metric signs on I-19 (Arizona) 
deferred
      To: [email protected]


      Due to the lack of a plan, there is no plan.  Since they couldn't decide 
exactly how to do it, they are not going to do it at all.

      Metric sign replacement on I-19 has been indefinitiely postponed, and the 
funds
      committed to another project.
      
http://www.azstarnet.com/news/local/article_d7dec8f6-26f5-11df-b567-001cc4c03286.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell 
us now 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us 
now 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us 
now 

Reply via email to