Just received by email - any comments?

To whom it may concern. My name is John M****. I live in Langley British Columbia Canada just outside of the city of Vancouver. I would like to make a comment about Kilometers on UK roads. In Canada we switched from miles to kilometers on Sept. 1 1977. At the same time all new cars sold in Canada had to have a metric speedometer. There was no problem with people getting used to thinking metric. There were a lot of drivers over the age of 50 when the road signs were changed. My Muther was 58 years old when the kilometer speeds came in. She had been driving for almost 35 years at that time, all with miles per hour speeds. She bought a new car in Jan. 1978 it had a Km speedometer and she had no trouble using it because all the speed and distance signs were metric. My point is that people can change if the change is done correctly. I feel the way to change the road signs in any country is to do it all at the same time, and to have all vehicles be they motor cycles or transport trucks have kilometer speedometers. Another comment I would like to make is that a lot of anti metric people seem to think that people over the age of 50 can't learn the metric system. I myself am 54 years old and get offended when people say that people my age couldn't learn the metric system. I was educated and raised with imperial never knew anything about metric until I was in my 20's. I also would like to say that English people are just as smart as the people of any other nation that has gone metric, and can learn as well as anybody else. If I were an Englishmen and was told that I couldn't learn the metric system I would be greatly offended.

AMENDED MESSAGE

To whom it may concern. My name is John M****. I live in Langley British Columbia Canada just outside of the city of Vancouver. I would like to make a comment about communism on UK roads. In Canada we switched from capitalism to communism on Sept. 1 1977. At the same time all new cars sold in Canada had to have a communist speedometer. There was no problem with people getting used to thinking communist. There were a lot of drivers over the age of 50 when the road signs were changed. My mother was 58 years old when communism came in. She had been driving for almost 35 years at that time, all with capitalist speeds. She bought a new car in Jan. 1978; it had a communist speedometer and she had no trouble using it because all the speed and distance signs were communist. My point is that people can change if the change is done correctly. I feel the way to change the road signs in any country is to do it all at the same time, and to have all vehicles be they motor cycles or transport trucks have communist speedometers. Another comment I would like to make is that a lot of anti-communist people seem to think that people over the age of 50 can't learn communism. I myself am 54 years old and get offended when people say that people my age couldn't learn communism. I was educated and raised with capitalism and never knew anything about communism until I was in my 20's. I also would like to say that English people are just as smart as the people of any other nation that has gone communist, and can learn as well as anybody else. If I were an Englishman and was told that I couldn't learn the communist system I would be greatly offended.

A reply received by email:

"I would like to respond to a message I recieved this afternoon about metric speeds on UK roads. In my message, he changed the word metric to Communism. I don't see the relationship between a system of measurement and a system of government. If this person feels that the metric system is communist then he'll have to ask the UK auto industry why for years they have given the displacement of their engines in liters and not cubic inches. Even in Canada when we got British cars the displacement of the engines were always in liters. I would like to know if this person feels that the metric system is communist all the way threw, if he does I feel that he'll have some questions to ask some of the UK industry. Perkins engines one of the worlds largest diesel engine builders with it's headquarters in the UK have gone metric on the fascinors on their engines. I want you to know that I do not belong to any pro-metric group the feelings I am expressing on this site are my personel feelings, and are not intended to offend anybody in any way. I just would like to discuss these feelings. Again don't forget the people of the UK are as smart as anybody else in the world.

This claptrap from Tony Bennett sounds as though it was taken straight from a speech by a South African pro-Apartheid politician of the 1960's and 1970's. I thought that I had left that behind when I left SOuth Africa.

Tony, from the comments you have made above comparing metric to Communism, you have simply confirmed that you are ANTI-METRIC and not pro-choice. Some of the people on this board, e.g BWMA forum owner, SteveH; I can see are pro-choice. It is quite clear that you are anti-metric and call yourself pro-choice as it sounds better. Anyway, the name of the organisation summarises it: Active Resistance to Metrication. Shouldn't it be Campaign for Choice of Measurements?

re: "you have simply confirmed that you are ANTI-METRIC and not pro-choice..."

REPLY: Suppose, in Soviet Russia, a 'Conservative Democratic Party' had put up a candidate against the Communist Party. I probably would have preferred to vote for the 'Conservative Democratic Party'. So I would have been 'pro-choice'. I am 'pro-choice' on the metric issue as I do not and never will believe that it is right for the government to make it a criminal offence punishable by huge fines for an Englishman* (Cambrian or Scot) to sell to his* fellow countrymen in his* own preferred units of measurement. And yes. I prefer Imperial to metric, as do most Brits.

I also prefer butter to margarine. That does not necessarily make me anti-margarine. But I would probably be more anti-margarine if someone told me I'd have to have it and could not longer have butter.



* I would like to offer a craven apology to the new Commission for Equality and Human Rigts. I really meant to say 'Englishwoman or Englishman' and I also meant to say 'her/his'. I plead guilty and wish you to take account, when passing sentence, of the stress I was under at the time. Thank you

I am pleased that BWMA has posted a pro-metric contribution in order to balance the argument.

Ross,

I hope this helps you to believe that BWMA are keen to see both sides of the argument in a balanced manner rather than the cr*p posted on other boards that make out that the BWMA are a rabid bunch of old-timers who hate anyone without an English accent?

Right, where do I join?

<<<I am 'pro-choice' on the metric issue as I do not and never will believe that it is right for the government to make it a criminal offence punishable by huge fines for an Englishman* (Cambrian or Scot) to sell to his* fellow countrymen in his* own preferred units of measurement.>>>

Tony

How you can claim to be "pro-choice" is beyond me!

I understand your argument regarding traders not being allowed to sell in lbs/oz (after 2010) because there will no longer be a choice. While I think it is perfectly acceptable for the government to introduce such regulations I understand your objections to it.

So why don't you think people should have the right to use metric units on signs if they choose to do so?

I think the answer to my question is obvious - you are anti-metric.

I admit that I am anti-imperial (for official purposes, NOT in general conversation) so why can't you admit that you are anti-metric?

"So why don't you think people should have the right to use metric units on signs if they choose to do so?"

Don't forget the added safety complications regarding traffic signs

<<<Don't forget the added safety complications regarding traffic signs>>>

I don't think pedestrian signs in metres rather than yards has many safety implications.

It certainly has more safety permutations than a pound of apples landing on your foot!

I think there is a fundamental difference between purchasing things in a store and the signs on the street. First of all, purchasing is voluntary... if you don't understand the units, don't buy it. On the street, if you don't understand the units, you may cause an accident.
Second of all, in the store there is a series of individual transactions. One person can buy by the pound and the next by the kilogram without causing any confusion. On the street, everyone has to see the same sign and having dual units would be distracting at best.
Therefore, it is a legitimate purpose of government to harmonize the units of measurement on the streets, because there is a safety issue. (The signs are already harmonized, by the way.) Most of us would agree that ensuring the safety of drivers is more important than ensuring the right of the city council to choose their sign's units. But in the grocery store, there is no such issue and therefore the government should not unnecessarily interfere with private transactions.

What's so dangerous about signs in pedestrianised town centres that say "Toilets 200m" instead of "Toilets 220 yds" ?

Perhaps ARM are worried about an increase in the number of public trouser wetting incidents, or something.

re (Evil Engineer): "What's so dangerous about signs in pedestrianised town centres that say "Toilets 200m" instead of "Toilets 220 yds" ?

ANSWER:

The argument about metric pedestrian signs is about their *comprehensibility*.

When it comes to metric road traffic signs on motorways and roads, there is a double argument, namely comprehensibility *and* danger (as accepted by successive British Ministers for Transport)

Tony Bennett wrote

<<
The argument about metric pedestrian signs is about their *comprehensibility*.
>>

I doubt that most people could distinguish 200m from 200yd without at least pacing the distance out.

I do not see what in incomprehensible about "Toilets 200m", or better still "WC 200m" ("WC" is more international - I have seen "WC" in Germany and in the Netherlands even though the letters "WC" do not abbreviate Dutch or German words)

re (Martin): "I do not see what is incomprehensible about 'Toilets 200m'..."

REPLY:

The incomphrehensibility of '200m' is roughly equivalent to saying the following, to give some recent examples from these battle boards:

"198 metres of Stretch Limo"

"The Police are looking for a man between 177cm and 185cm tall"

"The Countess of Wessex's baby weighed 2.17 kilograms"

"A man fell 54 metres over Niagara Falls"

"A man fell 8,400 metres from an aeroplane and survived"

"It's about 27 kilometres to Salisbury"

"A Munro is defined as a mountain over 914 metres and 40 centimetres in height"

"The river level rose 85 centimetres last night"

"I had a 30.5 centimetre pizza last night"

"He had a 15-centimetre knife"

"His Ford Escort does 11.5 kilometres to the litre"

"She's lost 7 kilograms during the past 6 months"

"Country cottage for sale, 4 hectares of land"

"Nice rear garden, 33 metres"

"Lounge, 3.2 metres x 5.7 metres"

"22-inch, flat screen TV"

"I drank 5 litres last night"

"My biggest catch was a 6.73 kilogram pike"

"It's about two and a quarter kilometres to my school"

Tony Bennett wrote

<<
"A Munro is defined as a mountain over 914 metres and 40 centimetres in height"
>>

Now that is incomprerensible. The correct way to write it is

<<
"A Munro is defined as a mountain over 914.4 metres in height"
>>

In this way we do not repeat the word "metres".

"to give some recent examples from these battle boards"

Haven't you noticed we don't call them that anymore? We now have 'discussions' rather than 'battles'.

This is in the same way that 'cub hunting' is now 'autumn hunting' (soon to be followed by 'no hunting').

"22-inch, flat screen TV"

Tony,
Is this the one item you slipped in to see if everyone was paying attention?

Notable that to most of us who grew up with Imperial, this is probably the entry we paid the least attention to, as 22" is instantly recognized so we just picture it in our mind immediately and move on to the next item in the list. All the others require a mental conversion before they can be visualized.

>>> "Haven't you noticed we don't call them [Battle Boards] anymore? We now have 'discussions' rather than 'battles'."

The term "battle" did not refer to the discussions themelves, but to the wider battle outside. The term was borrowed from Peter Snow's election battle boards (BBC commentator). Changing them to "Discussion Forums" was an editorial decision. Does anyone think the name should be changed back?

No, I never liked "Battle boards" in the first place. As far as I'm concerned, "Message boards" should stay...

re (Paul EOS): "Tony, Is this the one item [22-inch TV screen - ed.] you slipped in to see if everyone was paying attention?"

REPLY: Well spotted. I hope I've made my point; I think even the metric zealots would have trouble for a moment visualising a 56-centimetre TV screen

Tony Bennett wrote

<<
re (Paul EOS): "Tony, Is this the one item [22-inch TV screen - ed.] you slipped in to see if everyone was paying attention?"

REPLY: Well spotted. I hope I've made my point; I think even the metric zealots would have trouble for a moment visualising a 56-centimetre TV screen
>>

Under UK law, a 22-inch TV screen does not always equate to a 22*2.54-cm TV screen. If a TV screen is measured in inches, then the measurement refers to the amount of TV tube that is present - if it is measured in cm, it refers to the size of the picture - a sublte difference!

"Well spotted. I hope I've made my point; I think even the metric zealots would have trouble for a moment visualising a 56-centimetre TV screen"

As it happens, and this is true, I find it easier to visualise a 56cm screen than 22". This is because I know that 56cm is half a metre plus a bit, but I have to convert 22ins to 1ft 10ins, and then visualise the sum of the two.

As for the title of the boards, I prefer 'Discussion Forums' as 'Anti-Metric Battle Boards' seemed to suggest that we were all on the same side and would use the boards to conspire against metrication. The change was a worthwhile and inclusive move.

Martin: "Under UK law, a 22-inch TV screen does not always equate to a 22*2.54-cm TV screen. If a TV screen is measured in inches, then the measurement refers to the amount of TV tube that is present - if it is measured in cm, it refers to the size of the picture - a sublte difference!"

Doesn't it just show the agenda of the government that the law refers to the actual picture size size only if specified in metric?

This is certainly confusing for some people:

http://www.itc.org.uk/itc_publications/complaints_reports/advertising_complaints/show_complaint.asp?ad_complaint_id=476

A similar federal ruling was enacted in the U.S. some years ago stating that a 22" specification must refer to the actual picture size.

There was no need for any of these laws. Anyone who doesn't realize that on a 22" tube the actual picture will be slightly less probably doesn't realize that the measurement is a diagonal either.

Paul,

The Government was tightening up on trade descriptions and introducing metric units at the same time. Unfortunately the Great British Public, educated no doubt by Murdoch et al failed to appreciate the difference.

I'm a hifi/video enthusiast.

We would never express TV's in cm.

Actually (he boasts) mine is a whopping 56"

The government may have been tightening up on trade descriptions, but this is an instance where they had no business meddling.

Technical specifications for TV have specified the TUBE size for decades.

This is a case of the government wanting everyone to change to international SI measurements in the "interests of standardization," but refusing to accept another established technical standard which had been in use for decades.