I've received this via e-mail from a Christian evangelist working in Paksitan - a somewhat dangerous occupation! Since his e-mails may be monitored, we stick to non-controversial things like measurements, and here's what he says:

"The measurements here are very mixed. All fruit & veg are sold by the kilo except for those sold by counting them. Distances are measured in km, but there are remnants of the previous system. Cloth is sold by gus (yard). Furniture is measured in inches. But generally measuring things is not a very Pakistani thing to do".

<<
But generally measuring things is not a very Pakistani thing to do".
>>

From what I have seen in my travels, we could substitute any third world country in place of "Pakistani". In other words, don't get too excited just because some third world country happens to be using Imperial units (or for that matter metric units).

Whats the point in your posts, that habits die very hard? Just say so and have it over and done with.

re (metre): "What's the point in your posts?"

REPLY: In this case - as in most others by various people on the international board - the circulation of relevant information. In other cases, the circulation of relevant arguments and ideas. Occasioanlly, to raise a laugh

Ingore him.

Generally the rest of us do!

Points September 23 2004, 9:08 AM


re (metre): "What's the point in your posts?"

REPLY: In this case - as in most others by various people on the international board - the circulation of relevant information. In other cases, the circulation of relevant arguments and ideas. Occasioanlly, to raise a laugh

metre:
To whom, but Pakistanis is it relevant? Or did you do it so we all can have laugh that humans are prisoners of habit?

re (metre): "...so we all can have laugh that humans are prisoners of habit?"

REPLY: Like the French with the metric system, you mean?

<<
REPLY: Like the French with the metric system, you mean?
>>

The French stopped developing the metric sysetm in about 1799. Subsequent develpers were the Germans (Gauss was frsponsible for the second becoming the unit of time in the metric system) and then in the mid ninteenth century the BRITISH took control when they introduced the concept of equivalence of energy and used that to develop the system of electrical units.

Faced with this, the French set up an international organisation the BIPM and donated a piece of land near Sevres for their use. The prototype metre and kilogram there under the control of the BIPM.

Both the current and the pervious directors of the BIPM are British. Furthermore, of the seventeen scientists or engineers who have SI units named after them, SIX are British, four are German and THREE are French.

In my book the score

Britain 6 - France 3

make Britain the winner.

Can you tell me what I've won, martin?

The excitement of knowing that we have beaten the French! - What else did you want?

Being pro-european I don't particularly get any satisfaction in 'beating the french' with a system that us Brits don't like (or prefer to our own) in the first place.

:-)

BTW - is it just me or are almost all the forums "broken" for the moment?

re (SteveH): "BTW - is it just me or are almost all the forums 'broken' for the moment?"

REPLY: The fisrt three boards have not been functioning for about 48-60 hours

Re: Points September 24 2004, 9:43 AM


re (metre): "...so we all can have laugh that humans are prisoners of habit?"

TB:
REPLY: Like the French with the metric system, you mean?

metre:
Just for the fun, the French, and everybody else except the Yanks, actually discarded their beloved, but obsolete units. So compelling is metric simplicity! Don't dispair, you will follow soon.

...back to trolling then.

Martin, instead of just counting units, why don't you weight each unit according to the amount it is used? More often used units should be weighted more heavily. Units not named after anyone can be counted under the country they come from, or the country with the units from which they were derived. Then you will have a very different picture.

Bud, the point that I was making was that the metric system is not a "French" system, but rather an "International" one in which the British have played a very prominent role. Even a few Americans are commemorated by having units of measure named after them:

Henry - unit of inductance

Telsa - unit of magnetic field strength. (Tesla was born in what today is Croatia, but he emigrated to the US as a young man and did most of his work there).

Martin - try to get used to the fact that almost all people will see the metric system as a french system due to it being born in france.

The anti-metric lobby rely on myths such as 'the metric system is french' and 'europe is making us go metric' because if they relied on facts they would lose the battle. Unfortuantely many people believe what they read in the Sun.

Just look at the metric martyrs case - It was only a story until the truth came out

<<The anti-metric lobby rely on myths such as 'the metric system is french'>>

The metric systems has its roots in France.

<<and 'europe is making us go metric' >>

Europe is not - the political experiment called "The EU" is. Ask an average spanish person if grocery store in the UK should be forced to go "metric".

Andy - it pays to read more than one newspaper.

I give up. If someone who has a particular interest in the subject is taken in by these myths, then I don't hold out much hope for the average man on the street!

SteveH wrote

<<
The metric systems has its roots in France.
>>

It had to have its roots somehwere - however many nationalities have contributed to it.

Taking your aguement to its logical conclusion - what symbols do you use to represent the numeral - I use "1", "2", "3" even though they originated in the Arab world. (By some strange quirk the digits that the Arabs were developed by the Hindu mathematicians). You could use I, II, III, IV, V etc, but then they were develioped by the Italians (or at any rate the Romans).

" I give up. If someone who has a particular interest in the subject is taken in by these myths... "

Perhaps you have been taken in by these myths.
eg, if we left the EU there would be 3 million unemployed.

Face it, mate, you have a different opinion to me.
And just like you are entitled to it - then so am I.

You're getting to sound increasingly like eric.

Sorry for jumping over your post there, martin (and I did read it with interest, believe me) but with Andy simply telling me that I was taken in by myths on a subject I believe I am well versed in is a tad annoying. My biggest political interests involve the UK, Europe and the EU and the relationships therein.

Steve, No need to be so touchy - you're not getting nervous about saturdays match already are you?

In my opinion the statement 'the EU/Europe is making us go metric' is a myth. There are elements of truth in it - i.e. the regulations on metrication that the british government agreed to are EU regulations rather than british ones. But if there weren't these EU regulations, for example if we weren't even in the EU they would simply have drawn up their own regulations as the british government (whatever party is in power) will always know that it is in our best interests to complete metrication.

"Steve, No need to be so touchy - you're not getting nervous about saturdays match already are you?"

Now you mention it....

Actually I'm looking forward to it - its been 20 yrs since the last game and Wales won that one. So either thats a "good omen" or now its "your turn". Could be a fantastic match though, when you consider who will be up against who.

"In my opinion the statement 'the EU/Europe is making us go metric' is a myth."

The basis for this notion goes way back to when the UK was trying to get into the common market.

"the british government (whatever party is in power) will always know that it is in our best interests to complete metrication."

For domestic stuff this is simply not the case. And no party (whatever party is out of power) will ever "sell" metrication at domestic level. The government are elected by the people.

(well actually, "parliament" is)

Andy said
"i.e. the regulations on metrication that the british government agreed to are EU regulations rather than british ones."

Sorry??????

I assume you are referring to The Units of Measurement Regs 1994. Agreed, they do implement an EU Directive, but were drafted and passed by the UK Parliament of the time.

re (Beranger): "I assume you are referring to The Units of Measurement Regs 1994. Agreed, they do implement an EU Directive, but were drafted and passed by the UK Parliament of the time".

REPLY: 'Directive' is a polite word for 'order'. The UK Parliament, under the Conservatives, passed that Regulation in 1994 because, sooner or later, they had to. The Labour Government of 2000 gave it effect - introduced a wholly new set of crimes* - because, sooner or later, they had to. Conservative, Labour, Conservative, Labour, they all implement whatever they're told to by the E.U. institutions. Laughingly, when in Parliament they debate the implementation of a Euro Directive, it is called 'a debate'!

The same goes, incidentally, for U.K. adoption of the euro; we only have a temporary 'opt-out'


* P.S. Labour has introduced 270 new crimes since 1997. Not quite one a week

Tony said

1) "'Directive' is a polite word for 'order'."

Is Tony suggesting that the UK govt are impolite when they pass legislation with names like "The Price Marking Order"

2) "The UK Parliament, under the Conservatives, passed that Regulation in 1994 because, sooner or later, they had to."

Agreed. Legislation could have been passed at any time between 1979 (when the directive came out) & 2000.

3) "The Labour Government of 2000 gave it effect"

The Labour govt did not do anything. They could have repealed the effective date of the Conservative legislation but took no action. This is not the same as "giving it effect" (Tony, remember I don't support either Lab/Con myself!)

4) "introduced a wholly new set of crimes"

Disagree - the regulations extended the existing crime of using unauthorised units to previously legal units. A lead-in period of approx. 6 years was given to allow conversion.

5) "P.S. Labour has introduced 270 new crimes since 1997. Not quite one a week"

I would have thought that the figure was far higher! Where do you get this low figure from?



From the directive......

"Article 3

1. For the purposes of this Directive ‘supplementary indication’ means one or more indications of quantity expressed in units of measurement not contained in Chapter I of the Annex accompanying an indication of quantity expressed in a unit contained in that Chapter.

2. The use of supplementary indications shall be authorised until [31 December 2009].

3. However, Member States may require that measuring instruments bear indications of quantity in a single legal unit of measurement."


The UK did not choose to impose only metric - they allowed dual machines to stay in use. I suspect that dual machines may stay in use after 2009. The fact that very few traders have chosen to use dual machines speaks for itself....

BTW - Tony, are you still a UKIP member/supporter, or are you now loyal to the unaligned ex-UKIP MEP that you were recently working for....

BTW 2 - Does the FOI Act extend to expenses from the EC parliament, or to how much is paid for their research expenses....

re (Beranger): "BTW - Tony, are you still a UKIP member/supporter, or are you now loyal to the unaligned ex-UKIP MEP that you were recently working for..."

REPLY: I remain a UKIP member, as I have been continuously since 2 November 1997, when I left the Labour Party, which I had joined in 1985. Robert Kilroy-Silk (also ex-Labour) remains a UKIP member - as well as me and 28,000 others - and I'm still working for him

Tony said
"REPLY: I remain a UKIP member, as I have been continuously since 2 November 1997, when I left the Labour Party, which I had joined in 1985. Robert Kilroy-Silk (also ex-Labour) remains a UKIP member - as well as me and 28,000 others - and I'm still working for him"

Sorry Tony, I was obviously mistaken & everything is rosy in the UKIP garden. It makes you wonder why the papers print stuff like the muck-raking below.....

The Times 28 October

"ROBERT KILROY-SILK resigned yesterday as an MEP for the UK Independence Party, turning his back on the group that had threatened to kick him out.
The former chat-show host said that he would sit as an independent MEP and remain a member of UKIP, but would have to “rethink” his intention to stand for the party in the forthcoming general election.

It was the party’s most rancorous day since Mr Kilroy-Silk began his struggle to oust its leader, Roger Knapman, three and a half weeks ago.

Mr Kilroy-Silk said that he took the decision to leave yesterday morning, hours before the UKIP’s 11 MEPs were due to meet in Strasbourg to discuss whether he should be expelled from the group.

He said that it was a huge relief to distance himself from the UKIP MEPs whose behaviour he had found embarrassing, and accused Nigel Farage, the MEP closest to Mr Knapman, of secretly running the party.

“I’ve won and I’ve walked away,” Mr Kilroy-Silk said after attending a session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg. “They’ve backed down, they were going to withdraw the whip, but I kept saying, this isn’t due process, and not the way to run a political party.

“Not only do we have an invisible leader, we have incompetence on a large scale,” he said. “Nigel treats the party as a one-man plaything, and the leader just says ‘yes Nigel, no Nigel’.

“I’m relieved not to have to defend some of the strange things they’ve done,” he said, citing UKIP MEPS who had told women to clean behind the fridge, and another who compared withdrawal from the EU to the Chechen struggle for independence from Russia, “days after the Beslan massacre”.

Mr Farage said that he regretted Mr Kilroy-Silk’s departure, but that he left because he wanted to pursue his leadership battle. “This is about leadership and personalities. My views on it were clear: he had gone too far and we had to do something about it."

BTW - I made around 7 points (some were even about W&M!) in my message of 4th Nov. You have nothing to say about any of them then.....

PS Good to see you back - the boards have been quiet recently!

Dear Beranger,

My factual posting about Robert Kilroy-Silk and myself does not of course imply that 'everything in the UKIP garden is rosy'. UKIP is the best political vehicle I know for helping the millions in this country articulate their increasing suspicion about giving away ever more powers to the European Union, but that doesn't mean to say it's anywhere near perfect. Now, on to the other points in your posting of 4 November (see next posting):

re (Beranger):

Tony said 1) "'Directive' is a polite word for 'order'." Is Tony suggesting that the UK govt are impolite when they pass legislation with names like "The Price Marking Order"

REPLY: As you must surely have realised, I was making a point about the use and abuse of language.

The word 'order' is clear, honest and straightforward. The word 'Directive' is a softer-sounding word.

An example of the E.U.'s misuse of language comes with the word 'harmonisation'.

As any musician knows, harmony is about *different notes* being sung or played in harmony. e.g. C, E and G on a musical instrument. But when the E.U. uses the word 'harmonisation' e.g. in a weights and measures context, it really means 'standardisation', i.e. being compelled by law all to sing or play *the same note*.

***************************************************************************

2) "The UK Parliament, under the Conservatives, passed that Regulation in 1994 because, sooner or later, they had to." Agreed. Legislation could have been passed at any time between 1979 (when the directive came out) & 2000.

REPLY: Noted

**************************************************************************

3) "The Labour Government of 2000 gave it effect"

The Labour govt did not do anything. They could have repealed the effective date of the Conservative legislation but took no action. This is not the same as "giving it effect" (Tony, remember I don't support either Lab/Con myself!)

REPLY: In this context, it is worth reading 'The Great Gram Scam' by Vivian Linacre, the former Director of British Weights and Measures Association.

In it, he describeed how on the very last day of the Parliamentary session, in July 1999, on a Friday afternoon when there was plenty of other news [another 'good day to bury bad news'?], the government leaked a summary of its report that it would now give effect to the Units of Measurement Regulations 1994.

For the previous two years, it had stated that it was 're-evaluating' compulsory metrication and gave out many a hint that it was seriously considering whether to implement the sale of loose goods in kilograms, thus - almost certainly - deliberately misleading BWMA and tens of thousands of traders.

It then embarked on a programme of briefing Trading Standards Officers, in meetings and by cirulars, on how to browbeat traders into submission by threatening them with heavy fines and even the loss of their business if they did not comply. It was in this context that Chris Howell, the Director of LACOTS - the Trading Standards' politburo - made his infamous remark that recalcitrant traders would become 'martyrs' who would 'pay a heavy price'. It was that remark which directly led UKIP MEP Jeffrey Titford and myself to set up the UKIP Metric Martyrs Fund on 6 January 2000.

***************************************************************************

4) "introduced a wholly new set of crimes". Disagree - the regulations extended the existing crime of using unauthorised units to previously legal units. A lead-in period of approx. 6 years was given to allow conversion.

REPLY: The fact is that on 31 December 1999 it was not a crime to weigh, sell and price goods by the pound. On 1 January 2000 it was

***************************************************************************

5) "P.S. Labour has introduced 270 new crimes since 1997. Not quite one a week". I would have thought that the figure was far higher! Where do you get this low figure from?

REPLY: I heard this quoted on the BBC. I think that if you include every separate new crime, it would amount to over 1,000. A good example is the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, which introduced a swathe of new crimes like not notifying the Electoral Commission within 28 days of the change in who is the Treasurer of your Party Branch Committee! There are literally dozens of new crimes in this Act alone. The Soviet Union also created thousands of new crimes

**************************************************************************

The UK did not choose to impose only metric - they allowed dual machines to stay in use. I suspect that dual machines may stay in use after 2009. The fact that very few traders have chosen to use dual machines speaks for itself...

REPLY: It doesn't 'speak for itself' at all. Many traders were simply misinformed that they 'had to' buy metric-only scales. You need to look up the legal meaning of 'res ipsa loquitur' - 'the thing speaks for itself'

***************************************************************************

BTW 2 - Does the FOI Act extend to expenses from the EC parliament, or to how much is paid for their research expenses....

REPLY: Details of what MEPs are entitled to in the way of salaries, pensions, secretarial, research and office expenses are all publicly available


Tony

Tony

Thanks for your reply. In response:-

1) "Harmonisation" (definition - Chambers Dictionary 1983 edition) "in the EEC, the progressive introduction of norms & standards applicable in all EEC countries" How does a 21 year old (at least 21 - I don't have the previous edition) definition constitute "misuse"?

2) "Vivien Linacre"
Having had the dubious pleasure of listening to Vivien make a presentation, I do not consider him to be any great authority. He stated that the pound could be divided into thirds (!!!!) and was therefore superior to metric. He also compared metrication with ethnic cleansing. I found his comparison more than slightly distasteful.

3) You stated "For the previous two years, it [the govt] had stated that it was 're-evaluating' compulsory metrication and gave out many a hint that it was seriously considering whether to implement the sale of loose goods in kilograms, thus - almost certainly - deliberately misleading BWMA and tens of thousands of traders."
I don't recall this - can you provide some documentation to back this up? (Obviously, I mean something from the executive, not just 1 or 2 backbenchers)

4)You stated "It then embarked on a programme of briefing Trading Standards Officers, in meetings and by cirulars, on how to browbeat traders into submission by threatening them with heavy fines and even the loss of their business if they did not comply."
I recall no meetings with the government. Lacots/Lacors did put out guidance - but please show me where that guidance uses words like "browbeat" "heavy fines" or "loss of business"

5) You said "It was in this context that Chris Howell, the Director of LACOTS - the Trading Standards' politburo"
Chris will no doubt be delighted about this promotion. As far as I am aware, he was TSI's (ITSA's) metrology lead officer at the time

6) You also said "It was that remark which directly led UKIP MEP Jeffrey Titford and myself to set up the UKIP Metric Martyrs Fund on 6 January 2000"
Is there any chance that you might update the pages on the UKIP site that contain "The Imperial Register"? The only 2 traders in my local area that are named (as imperial) are both metric. Incidentally, the addresses & local council areas for these traders mentioned are also wrong (Isle of Scull, for f***s sake!!!!)

7) "REPLY: The fact is that on 31 December 1999 it was not a crime to weigh, sell and price goods by the pound. On 1 January 2000 it was"
It still wasn't a new crime - only an extension of an existing one

8) "REPLY: It doesn't 'speak for itself' at all. Many traders were simply misinformed that they 'had to' buy metric-only scales."
Nonsense. I believe that TSO's informed traders of all the legal options available. I would agree that dual scales are more expensive. Perhaps traders choose the cheaper option as a matter of good business practice?
I note that Tesco (named as an "imperial trader" on your register & with excellent legal staff) have not chosen to use dual scales.

9) "You need to look up the legal meaning of 'res ipsa loquitur' - 'the thing speaks for itself'"
I didn't realise we were in court. Secondly, even though Latin is still used in the Scots legal system, it is not as prevalent as in England. Thirdly, when did you get your Scots Law degree & practice certificate?

10) You replied to "BTW 2 - Does the FOI Act extend to expenses from the EC parliament, or to how much is paid for their research expenses...."
I'm quite aware regarding information that is available. I'm just amused that your salary is paid by the EC.

Thanks for updating me about the problems in the UKIP - I didn't realise this.

They still get my support in the Euro elections though.

Still on the fence regarding the next G.Election - however it *WON'T* be to the EU surrender monkeys called "The labour party" aka "Tony Blair" if you get my drift

re (Beranger):

1) "Harmonisation" (definition - Chambers Dictionary 1983 edition) "in the EEC, the progressive introduction of norms & standards applicable in all EEC countries"

REPLY: I rest my case
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) "Vivian Linacre"
Having had the dubious pleasure of listening to Vivien make a presentation, I do not consider him to be any great authority. He stated that the pound could be divided into thirds (!!!!) and was therefore superior to metric...

REPLY: 6/8d., 6/8d. and 6/8d. = £1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) You stated "For the previous two years, it [the govt] had stated that it was 're-evaluating' compulsory metrication and gave out many a hint that it was seriously considering whether to implement the sale of loose goods in kilograms, thus - almost certainly - deliberately misleading BWMA and tens of thousands of traders." I don't recall this - can you provide some documentation to back this up? (Obviously, I mean something from the executive, not just 1 or 2 backbenchers)

REPLY: Buy and read Vivian Linacre's "Great Gram Scam" (available from BWMA) - it's all in there
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) You stated "It then embarked on a programme of briefing Trading Standards Officers, in meetings and by cirulars, on how to browbeat traders into submission by threatening them with heavy fines and even the loss of their business if they did not comply." I recall no meetings with the government. Lacots/Lacors did put out guidance - but please show me where that guidance uses words like "browbeat" "heavy fines" or "loss of business"

REPLY: ITSA's Head of Metrology (Chris Howell) said that 'metric martyrs would pay a heavy price'. Once again, I rest my case
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

5) You said "It was in this context that Chris Howell, the Director of LACOTS - head of the Trading Standards' politburo". Chris will no doubt be delighted about this promotion. As far as I am aware, he was TSI's (ITSA's) metrology lead officer at the time

REPLY: See previous answer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

6) You also said "It was that remark which directly led UKIP MEP Jeffrey Titford and myself to set up the UKIP Metric Martyrs Fund on 6 January 2000"
Is there any chance that you might update the pages on the UKIP site that contain 'The Imperial Register'? The only 2 traders in my local area that are named (as imperial) are both metric. Incidentally, the addresses & local council areas for these traders mentioned are also wrong (Isle of Scull, for f***s sake!!!!)

REPLY: I ceased working for Jeffrey Titford in February 2001 and any responsibility for updating the Imperial Traders' Register ended then. If it's still out-of-date, contact the UKIP webmaster
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

7) "The fact is that on 31 December 1999 it was not a crime to weigh, sell and price goods by the pound. On 1 January 2000 it was". It still wasn't a new crime - only an extension of an existing one

REPLY: Have it your way
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

8) "It doesn't 'speak for itself' at all. Many traders were simply misinformed that they 'had to' buy metric-only scales." Nonsense. I believe that TSOs informed traders of all the legal options available. I would agree that dual scales are more expensive. Perhaps traders choose the cheaper option as a matter of good business practice? I note that Tesco (named as an "Imperial Trader" on your register & with excellent legal staff) have not chosen to use dual scales.

REPLY: Noted
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

9) "You need to look up the legal meaning of 'res ipsa loquitur' - 'the thing speaks for itself'" I didn't realise we were in court. Secondly, even though Latin is still used in the Scots legal system, it is not as prevalent as in England. Thirdly, when did you get your Scots Law degree & practice certificate?

REPLY: Ah! Scottish sarcasm! But then 'res ipsa loquitur' is just as much part of Scottish law as it is part of English law. If I'm using too much Latin for you, all I can say is: 'mea culpa'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

10) You replied to "BTW 2 - Does the FOI Act extend to expenses from the EC parliament, or to how much is paid for their research expenses...." I'm quite aware regarding information that is available. I'm just amused that your salary is paid by the EC.

REPLY: No. By the European Parliament, actually - that body which is said to have 'powers of co-decision' [I really like that one! - better than the average level of Euro-deceit] with the European Commission

_______

ENDS

Tony
Thanks for your witty replies. I'll laugh all day tomorrow at your ability to deliberately misunderstand questions.

Here are my questions, followed by your responses and my further comments

1) How does a 21 year old definition constitute "misuse"?
A. "I rest my case"

A fascinating, yet unclear response.

2) He stated that the pound [lb] could be divided into thirds (!!!!) and was therefore superior to metric...
A. "6/8d., 6/8d. and 6/8d. = £1"

An attempt to avoid the question by deliberately misunderstanding it.

3) I don't recall this - can you provide some documentation to back this up? (Obviously, I mean something from the executive, not just 1 or 2 backbenchers)
A. "Buy and read Vivian Linacre's "Great Gram Scam" (available from BWMA) - it's all in there"

I didn't realise that Vivian was part of the executive.

4) Please show me where that [Government/Lacors] guidance uses words like "browbeat" "heavy fines" or "loss of business"
A. "ITSA's Head of Metrology (Chris Howell) said that 'metric martyrs would pay a heavy price'. Once again, I rest my case"

Do newspaper quotations constitute Government guidance in your part of the world?

5) I questioned your assertion that Chris Howell was the Director of LACOTS

A. You referred me to "ITSA's Head of Metrology (Chris Howell) said that 'metric martyrs would pay a heavy price'. Once again, I rest my case"

You believe that Lacots (aka Lacors) & ITSA (aka TSI) are the same organisation?

6) Is there any chance that you might update the pages on the UKIP site that contain 'The Imperial Register'?

A. I ceased working for Jeffrey Titford in February 2001 and any responsibility for updating the Imperial Traders' Register ended then. If it's still out-of-date, contact the UKIP webmaster

5 minutes ago, it said "Q. I’m in Business – how do I best support my clients and Britain and ensure I get on the Register please? A. Glad you asked! Please contact:Tony Bennett"

7) "The fact is that on 31 December 1999 it was not a crime to weigh, sell and price goods by the pound. On 1 January 2000 it was". It still wasn't a new crime - only an extension of an existing one

A. "Have it your way"

A brilliant argument. It beats "Na na boo sucks" into the ground.

8) I believe that TSOs informed traders of all the legal options available.

A. "Noted"

Thank you for accepting one point I made

9) "You need to look up the legal meaning of 'res ipsa loquitur' - 'the thing speaks for itself'" I didn't realise we were in court. Secondly, even though Latin is still used in the Scots legal system, it is not as prevalent as in England. Thirdly, when did you get your Scots Law degree & practice certificate?

A. "Ah! Scottish sarcasm! But then 'res ipsa loquitur' is just as much part of Scottish law as it is part of English law. If I'm using too much Latin for you, all I can say is: 'mea culpa'"

You obviously experience a lot of Latin in court. Experientia docet stultos.

"I note that Tesco (named as an "Imperial Trader" on your register & with excellent legal staff) have not chosen to use dual scales."

Please note that the scales that the customers use are dual labelled. They may not be "legal scales" but few customers consult a lawyer when they measure out 2 lbs of apples.

Steve
Agreed re the customer checkweighers. The Coop also use dual marked scales.

You've already partly answered the questions below with your remark about legality, but, leaving the legality aside for a minute, which machine is more accurate?

Electronic digital 15kg by 5g divisions
Spring balance 5kg/10lb by 10g/0.5oz divisions

If the machines differ (which they will any time the digital machine ends in a 5 [and that takes no account of the questionable accuracy of the checkweigher]) , which one counts as the defined weight the customer pays for?

re (Beranger):

Tony, Thanks for your witty replies. I'll laugh all day tomorrow at your ability to deliberately misunderstand questions. Here are my questions, followed by your responses and my further comments

1) How does a 21 year old definition constitute "misuse"? A. "I rest my case". BERANGER: A fascinating, yet unclear response.

REPLY: I'm slightly suprised at you, Beranger, for you are an intelligent man. I thought it would be clear to you that, in stating 'I rest my case', I was referring to the *special* definition given for harmonisation that you yourself produced from Chambers. Look up the *real* meaning of 'harmonisation' in any dictionary, and it does not mean 'standardisation'. Yet the definition you quote *proves* that the word 'harmonisation means something entirely different when the European Union institutions use the word.

So, once again, I rest my case - and if you've forgotten what 'my case' was, it was precisely that the E.U. deliberately misleads us by applying nice-sounding words to nasty processes

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) He stated that the pound [lb] could be divided into thirds (!!!!) and was therefore superior to metric... A. "6/8d., 6/8d. and 6/8d. = £1". BERANGER:
An attempt to avoid the question by deliberately misunderstanding it.

REPLY: Well, next time, make clear *which* pound you're talking about. Of course, by choosing virtually the only exception that proves the universal rule (viz., the avoirdupois pound) - namely that the duodecimal system is much easier for division purposes than metric, you make an elegant and forceful point against your preferred measurement system, since *no* metric unit whatsoever can be perfectly divided by three

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) I don't recall this - can you provide some documentation to back this up? (Obviously, I mean something from the executive, not just 1 or 2 backbenchers). A. "Buy and read Vivian Linacre's "Great Gram Scam" (available from BWMA) - it's all in there". BERANGER: I didn't realise that Vivian was part of the executive.

REPLY: Oooh! Clever

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

4) Please show me where that [Government/Lacors] guidance uses words like "browbeat" "heavy fines" or "loss of business". A. "ITSA's Head of Metrology (Chris Howell) said that 'metric martyrs would pay a heavy price'. Once again, I rest my case". BERANGER: Do newspaper quotations constitute Government guidance in your part of the world?

REPLY: No, but then again, announced in a major interview in the best-selling quality daily, the quotation: 'those who wish to become martyrs will pay a heavy price" was pretty good evidence, amountig to proof, of government and civil service intent. But there is other evidence

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

5) I questioned your assertion that Chris Howell was the Director of LACOTS
A. You referred me to "ITSA's Head of Metrology (Chris Howell) said that 'metric martyrs would pay a heavy price'. Once again, I rest my case". BERANGER: You believe that Lacots (aka Lacors) & ITSA (aka TSI) are the same organisation?

REPLY: Oh, dear. Oh, dear. Oh dear oh dear. I seem to get me ITSAs, TSIs, LACOTSes, LACORses and TITSAs all muddled up. If *only* I had been a Trading Standards Officer for the past 15 years. Then I wouldn't get so befuddled

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

6) Is there any chance that you might update the pages on the UKIP site that contain 'The Imperial Register'? A. I ceased working for Jeffrey Titford in February 2001 and any responsibility for updating the Imperial Traders' Register ended then. If it's still out-of-date, contact the UKIP webmaster
BERANGER: 5 minutes ago, it said "Q. I’m in Business – how do I best support my clients and Britain and ensure I get on the Register please? A. Glad you asked! Please contact: Tony Bennett"

REPLY. Yes. Good point. So have you taken my advice yet?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

7) "The fact is that on 31 December 1999 it was not a crime to weigh, sell and price goods by the pound. On 1 January 2000 it was". It still wasn't a new crime - only an extension of an existing one. A. "Have it your way"
BERANGER: A brilliant argument. It beats "Na na boo sucks" into the ground.

REPLY: For once, I agree with you

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

8) I believe that TSOs informed traders of all the legal options available.
A. "Noted". BERANGER: Thank you for accepting one point I made

REPLY: Once again, you are going to have to reach up for your dictionary, or your thesaurus, or preferably both.

Noting is not the same as accepting.

The followng example may assist you in unravelling the difference:

EXAMPLE 1:

Q: Will you marry me? ANS: 'I accept'

EXAMPLE 2:

Q: Will you marry me? ANS: 'I note what you say'

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
9) "You need to look up the legal meaning of 'res ipsa loquitur' - 'the thing speaks for itself'" I didn't realise we were in court. Secondly, even though Latin is still used in the Scots legal system, it is not as prevalent as in England. Thirdly, when did you get your Scots Law degree & practice certificate? A. "Ah! Scottish sarcasm! But then 'res ipsa loquitur' is just as much part of Scottish law as it is part of English law. If I'm using too much Latin for you, all I can say is: 'mea culpa'". BERANGER: You obviously experience a lot of Latin in court. Experientia docet stultos.

REPLY: How true. How *very* true that is

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

<<Electronic digital 15kg by 5g divisions
Spring balance 5kg/10lb by 10g/0.5oz divisions

If the machines differ (which they will any time the digital machine ends in a 5 [and that takes no account of the questionable accuracy of the checkweigher]) , which one counts as the defined weight the customer pays for?>>>

I suspect that between zero and zero point one percent of people use those scales in order to ensure that the price marked is exactly - to the penny - the amount they pay for the exact weight they weigh out. Even on the 'non customer facing' ones.

I suspect the rest of the people would want, say, "2 pounds of apples". So thats what they weigh out. I also supect that if its for a recipe they'd go "a bit over" in order to have some spare, thus supreme accuracy is not the issue.

You are taking it from a very offical point of view rather than the way an ordinary person on their shopping round does - but I don't blame you for that, since it (appears to be) part of your background.

At least your nothing like Carlyle/Euric who goes on and on and on and on about the little print on the receipt (after conceding that they do use LB marker boards)!

Have you seen on the "front board" that he's back onto his "500g pound"? LOL!

Back to the subject though - When I weigh out 2 pounds of apples, what's the liklyhood of me getting exactly 2lbs without cutting an apple up? and if its, say, 2lbs and 3.7 oz (or to that matter 1.128 kg) do you think the ordinary customer will get a calculator out to re-work the "per LB (per100g)" price to find out what price it should be or does that get left to the cashier where it gets priced up as anonymously as a newspaper gets scanned?

Not avoiding questions. Was typing replies at same time as chatting to pal on msn. Lost the whole lot when I tried to post. Will reply tomorrow

Now you're just showing off that you've got friends!

;-)

Tony said.....

"I was referring to the *special* definition given for harmonisation that you yourself produced from Chambers. Look up the *real* meaning of 'harmonisation' in any dictionary, and it does not mean 'standardisation'."

You keep referring to musical harmony. Apart from my previously quoted definition, the only non-musical definition I can find is "to reconcile". Does that not fit in with EC intentions - especially when they upgrade EC standards to correspond with previously existing UK ones.

And let's keep use of "softer" & "harder" sounding words in mind as we go on....

"Well, next time, make clear *which* pound you're talking about"

Ahh, yes. The Imperial system. Uncomplicated & understandable by all. Even Imperial's most extreme proponents believe that a BWMA representative would talk about a monetary system that was abandoned when I was a kid in a talk about weights & measures. Yes, Tony, as you say, Imperial does cause confusion.

"Of course, by choosing virtually the only exception that proves the universal rule (viz., the avoirdupois pound) - namely that the duodecimal system is much easier for division purposes than metric, you make an elegant and forceful point against your preferred measurement system, since *no* metric unit whatsoever can be perfectly divided by three"

Confuse the point as much as you wish Tony. You quoted Vivien as an "expert". I pointed out that he believes the pound (lb) can be divided by 3. I don't personally think that divisibility by 3 is the be all and end all of a measurement system.

"But there is other evidence"

I'm sure that there might well be. Why not post it? Especially anything containing the words "browbeat" "heavy fines" or "loss of business". As I said, let's keep use of "softer" & "harder" sounding words in mind as we go on....

"I seem to get me ITSAs, TSIs, LACOTSes, LACORses and TITSAs all muddled up. If *only* I had been a Trading Standards Officer for the past 15 years. Then I wouldn't get so befuddled"

Yes. 2 organisations, each of which have changed their names once during this saga. If you are easily confused, would you like me to email you to remind you whether your employer is subject to the UKIP whip this week for European Parliament votes?

"Yes. Good point. So have you taken my advice yet?"

I intend to send UKIP a postcard next time I'm on Scull Island.

Steve said....

"You are taking it from a very offical point of view rather than the way an ordinary person on their shopping round does - but I don't blame you for that, since it (appears to be) part of your background."

Guilty as charged ;-)

"Now you're just showing off that you've got friends!"

Proves I'm not a TSO. Look at Tony's descriptions of these jackbooted, stalinist, power-loving, statist, europhile, enforcement crazy, nazi-like members of various politburos. No wonder they have no friends :-) :-) ;-)

Sometimes you cannot blame those who are told to carry out actions laid down by a higher authority.

I'm sure that many true TSO officers feel sick that they have to disable a weighing scale bcause it has this:

"LB"

on it, while their time could have been spent checking out dangerous toys or closing down the dodgy kebab van which caused many people to be sick that night.

Am I not correct in assuming that "harmony" involves some degree of "happiness"?

Just thought I'd ask......

Tony said...'I was referring to the *special* definition given for harmonisation that you yourself produced from Chambers. Look up the *real* meaning of 'harmonisation' in any dictionary, and it does not mean 'standardisation'.' BERANGER: You keep referring to musical harmony. Apart from my previously quoted definition, the only non-musical definition I can find is "to reconcile". Does that not fit in with EC intentions - especially when they upgrade EC standards to correspond with previously existing UK ones.

REPLY: The non-musical definiitiion of 'harmony' in my Concise Oxford is: "an apt or pleasing arrangement of parts", or "the pleasing effects of this"; harmonise is defined as "make or form a pleasing whole". Do you consider that making people like the late Steven Thoburn criminals for selling in pounds and ounces is consistent with the dictionary definitions of 'harmony' and 'harmonise'?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Well, next time, make clear *which* pound you're talking about'. BERANGER: Ahh, yes. The Imperial system. Uncomplicated & understandable by all. Even Imperial's most extreme proponents believe that a BWMA representative would talk about a monetary system that was abandoned when I was a kid in a talk about weights & measures. Yes, Tony, as you say, Imperial does cause confusion.

REPLY: Actually, I haven't said that
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Of course, by choosing virtually the only exception that proves the universal rule (viz., the avoirdupois pound) - namely that the duodecimal system is much easier for division purposes than metric, you make an elegant and forceful point against your preferred measurement system, since *no* metric unit whatsoever can be perfectly divided by three'. BERANGER: Confuse the point as much as you wish Tony. You quoted Vivian as an "expert". I pointed out that he believes the pound (lb) can be divided by 3. I don't personally think that divisibility by 3 is the be all and end all of a measurement system

REPLY: No, I did not quote Vivian as an 'expert'. I did something similar. I referred you to his booklet as containing crucial evidence about the way in which the government deceived people between 1997 and 1999 into thinking that they were engaged on a comprehensive review of compulsory metrication when they were not. If you'd actually 'phoned up BWMA, got it and read it, you'd be much better informed
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'But there is other evidence'. BERANGER: I'm sure that there might well be. Why not post it? Especially anything containing the words "browbeat" "heavy fines" or "loss of business". As I said, let's keep use of "softer" & "harder" sounding words in mind as we go on...

REPLY: Why not post it? - because you can't be bothered to get hold of 'The Great Gram Scam', that's why
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I seem to get me ITSAs, TSIs, LACOTSes, LACORses and TITSAs all muddled up. If *only* I had been a Trading Standards Officer for the past 15 years. Then I wouldn't get so befuddled'. BERANGER: Yes. 2 organisations, each of which have changed their names once during this saga. If you are easily confused, would you like me to email you to remind you whether your employer is subject to the UKIP whip this week for European Parliament votes?

REPLY: Don't need one. He's made his position clear! Look at his widely-reported speech in the European Parliament yesterday about how the recent appointment of Peter Mandelson as the Trade Commissioner represents and epitomises the spirit of Europe - 'a man synonymous with lies, deceit, evasion and spin', he said
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Yes. Good point. So have you taken my advice yet?'. BERANGER: I intend to send UKIP a postcard next time I'm on Scull Island.

REPLY: Well, don't complain again about out-of-date material on the UKIP website again, then
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Now you're just showing off that you've got friends!' BERANGER: Proves I'm not a TSO. Look at Tony's descriptions of these jackbooted, stalinist, power-loving, statist, europhile, enforcement crazy, nazi-like members of various politburos. No wonder they have no friends

REPLY: Ah, but they do. Each other!

"From what I have seen in my travels, we could substitute any third world country in place of "Pakistani". In other words, don't get too excited just because some third world country happens to be using Imperial units (or for that matter metric units)."


Countries that are poor don't convert as fast as those that are rich, but the conversion is still in the direction of full metric, even in Liberia and Burma. Anything new that replaces anything old is metric. If you encounter something non-metric in a third world country it is something left over from colonial days. If I was an imperial user, I'd be embarrassed if the only examples of imperial found are in antique products and everything new and improved was metric.

No imperial user can nor ever will be able to show new technology in imperial units. This is where us supporters of metric take pleasure; in knowing metric is the chosen system of newness and the future and imperial is a dieing collection of antique units from the past.


BTW, I have found no reference to a unit called Gus. Even if someone says it means a yard, chances are it is equal to the metre and a metre stick is used to measure it out. It is common for some English speakers to rename metres as yards. We've seen it as late as recent reports of the Air France plane crash at Toronto, where spoken reports from witnesses said the plane skidded 200 m off the runway and that was later reported in the press as 200 yards.

Because no-one will respond to this he'll think he's "won".

Oops!

Re: Couple of gus please (Pakistan) August 6 2005, 4:28 PM

DJ
"From what I have seen in my travels, we could substitute any third world country in place of "Pakistani". In other words, don't get too excited just because some third world country happens to be using Imperial units (or for that matter metric units)."


metre
All this has been pointed out many times before without making the slightest impact on the inch brigade, so don't expect an answer, except from the resident gadfly.

Or the resident 3 gadflies