re: pints of beer and honesty regarding non-metric measures: you'd be surprised 
how many people don't even know about that view let alone share it.
Persuading people to move to metric *must* become more difficult if you tell 
those same people they're being dishonest.I use both imperial and metric.  I 
prefer imperial in many things but on those particular things I am not being 
dishonest.  Because I am not a dishonest person.

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:47472] Opponents of metrication change
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 15:04:09 +1000

Dear All,
The history of the metric system is the history of seeking honesty in all 
measurement. This is true from the earliest hieroglyphs about Thoth in the 
pyramids, through the first books of the Bible, to the current activities of 
the CGPM through the BIPM.
Opponents of honesty seek to maintain old pre-metric measures that have proven 
to be useful to dishonest people, for example pints of beer in the UK, barrels 
of oil internationally, and hiding the reality of metric inches, metric feet, 
etc.
One of the leading proponents in the world on the topic of how organisations 
change is Professor John Kotter from Harvard. Here is a 4 1/2 minute statement 
of what he has to say about opponents to the metrication cause.
http://www.kotterinternational.com/Default.aspx?showvideo=true&ID=126 
His message is clear, 'Mr NoNo is a no-no!'
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
On 2010/06/02, at 13:44 , Kilopascal wrote:  Paul,   Can you provide by example 
where offering the opposition a say on any matter has actually helped in 
promoting that particular matter?     Didn't metrication fail in the '70s~80s 
because the US Metric Board was required to include persons opposed to 
metrication?     You don't promote metrication by giving those who oppose your 
ideals a voice.  If you do, then you guarantee your ideal will NEVER bear 
fruit.  As for the statement below where ....The Listserver is meant to promote 
communication between USMA members and 
others interested in metrication, I would take it to mean something quite 
different.   Persons opposed to metrication are not interested in metrication.  
The whole concept of the existence of the USMA is to PROMOTE metrication.  If 
you allow those who oppose metrication to be apart of your group (even under 
the false belief that they will change their beliefs) your are assuring its 
failure.     I believe the words of Jesus in Matthew 12:30 apply to this 
situation:                
"He who is not with me is against me,       and he who does not gather with me 
scatters.             Think of how these words apply to the       issue at 
hand.  If the people whom you allow to be apart of your       group do not back 
you 100 % then your goals will fail.  Case and       point; the fate of the US 
Metric Board.             In order for the Listserver to be successful and meet 
      its goal, it must only contain members who support metrication, otherwise 
      metrication will continue to fail and people like your self will see your 
      frustrations increase.             Discussions and debates should be 
tailored to finding       ways to formulate a workable plan that can be 
presented to the government       in the name of the USMA.  I've have yet to 
see anything even close to       this happening.  By allowing those with 
opposing viewpoints, you have       caused the potential supporters of 
metrication to scatter, not       gather.  The result is a failure of the 
nation to metricate.                     Metrication needs strong leadership 
and that only comes       from surrounding yourself with true and loyal 
supporters.  If you       really want to see metrication happen in the US you 
will do what it       takes to assure the USMA is a group of supporters.  
Otherwise you       might as well give up and concede defeat.             
Opposing viewpoints may be an excellent source of lively       discussion, but 
it is a terrible source for promoting metrication.        The opposition is 
using you to divide your efforts and conquer you.        It is up to you as an 
officer in the USMA to determine if that is in       the USMA's best interests. 
            Truthfully, I doubt you will do what is right and       continue 
along the wrong path.  So, don't be surprised when your       frustration with 
going nowhere increases.  Actually, I think it is       somewhat exciting to 
watch the metric world progress at America's       expense.  Maybe helping keep 
the metric system out of the US isn't       such a bad thing, if it gives other 
the power to move ahead.                     Ametrica               
[USMA:47463] Purpose of USMA Listserver (was Re: Re: Bespoke tailoring)Paul 
Trusten
Mon, 31 May 2010 21:56:03 -0700
 Ametrica,

The description of the USMA Listserver is stated on our Web site at 
www.metric.org/listserver.htm , in part, as follows:

The Listserver is meant to promote communication between USMA members and 
others interested in metrication. The subscribers alone determine the volume 
and content of messages. 
I would interpret this to mean that, since metrication is a measurement issue, 
any discussion of related measurement issues is welcome.  While the majority of 
subscribers to our Listserver support U.S. metrication,  opposing viewpoints 
are always welcome. Indeed, opposing viewpoints are excellent sources of lively 
discussion of the issue.

Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
Public Relations Director
U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
[email protected]
www.metric.org
www.twitter.com/usmetric
+1(432)528-7724


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ametrica 
  To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; 
  Sent: 31 May, 2010 11:21
  Subject: [USMA:47454] Re: Bespoke tailoring


  What better way can you think of to damage metrication by using a pro-metric 
forum to utter non-metric terms?

  Why is this permitted?  



  [USMA:47454] Re: Bespoke tailoring
  Stephen Humphreys
  Sun, 30 May 2010 14:37:03 -0700

Interestingly enough for distances we would not say '200' for yards and '10' 
for miles but we do 'go unitless' on speed - eg 'We topped 140' - with the 
colloquialism extending to 100mph being called a 'ton' (do km countries refer 
to a ton like that?).  However most of our (long) distance signs are unitless.
BTW - with 'step down' measures (like 11 stone 11 as used below) time uses the 
same model - ie 'it took 4 minutes 20'

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:47453] Re: Bespoke tailoring
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 19:47:27 +0100

Pat NaughtinAuthor of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain 
from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 
Belmont 3216,Geelong, AustraliaPhone: 61 3 5241 2008Metric system consultant, 
writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds 
of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so 
economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or 
selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many 
different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and 
government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients 
include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric 
associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See 
http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat 
at [email protected] or to get the free 'Metrication matters' 
newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. 
                                          
_________________________________________________________________
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/197222280/direct/01/
Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now

Reply via email to