Will we revert to feet and inches after Brexit?

[Alasdair X]

When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?

[Roland Perry]

In message <e6f45b8c-72a3-4a18...@googlegroups.com>, at
06:26:36 on Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Alasdair X <him...@wabaxter.co.uk>
remarked:

>When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went
>from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms,

Not all of them.

>standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things
>too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the
>EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?

The question to ask is "what would the new third country export markets
we are apparently going to be opening up post-Brexit want us to do?"
--
Roland Perry

[TTman]

On 18/07/2018 14:26, Alasdair X wrote:
> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?
>

No. the UK is metric end of...

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2018-07-18, TTman <kraken...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18/07/2018 14:26, Alasdair X wrote:
>> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements
>> went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe
>> sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were
>> converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU,
>> will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?
>
> No. the UK is metric end of...

Some Quitlings have proposed going back to imperial measurements
as a "benefit" of Brexit, and given the current political climate
where something being utter nonsense doesn't prevent it from being
government policy, I wouldn't rule it out. Some of them have even
suggested going back to pre-decimal currency...

[Robin]

On 18/07/2018 15:37, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> Some of them have even
> suggested going back to pre-decimal currency...
>

That could be good for balance of payments. As a child serving
occasionally in a farm shop on the A20 in Kent I noted foreign visitors
often held out their coins for me to choose from, and rarely queried
their change ;)

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

[Roland Perry]

In message <pinj2f$v9f$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:32:47 on Wed, 18 Jul
2018, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> remarked:

>> No. the UK is metric end of...
>

>Except for pints and miles ...

And numerous construction things like doors being manufactured and sold
in some daft not-round-number of cm, when in fact they are 2'6" x 6'6"
(etc). Even planks of wood (which don't have to fit existing holes in
the wall) are 1220x38mm, which is 4'x1.5"

>If we were to be thrust back into the dark ages of imperial, I'd manage
>except for temperature. I still can't work or think in Fahrenheit.

I struggle with centigrade when it's in a weather forecast.
--
Roland Perry

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2018-07-18, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:38:45 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <pinj2f$v9f$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:32:47 on Wed, 18 Jul
>> 2018, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> remarked:

>>>If we were to be thrust back into the dark ages of imperial, I'd manage
>>>except for temperature. I still can't work or think in Fahrenheit.
>>
>> I struggle with centigrade when it's in a weather forecast.
>

> It's all I can understand. BBC local radio can be really annoying when
> they insist on *only* using F for weather.

Indeed, they say ridiculous things like "the temperature will be
ninety degrees", which if true would obviously mean we'd all be dead.

[Nightjar]

On 18/07/2018 14:26, Alasdair X wrote:

> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms,

We first considered metrication in 1818. The Metrication Board was set
up in 1969, but metric weights for goods did not become mandatory until
the year 2000. Even so, Imperial weights can still be used as
supplementary units.

> standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters

Imperial and metric copper tube are different sizes, as you would know
if you have ever tried to upgrade a plumbing system from before about
the mid-1960s. It was an economic decision to stop using a different
system from the rest of Europe.

Steel and plastic pressure pipes are still designated by the nominal
bore in inches - something that many people find confusing. Even if you
can convert metric to Imperial easily, it is not obvious that a pipe
that measures 89mm OD is actually a 3 inch pipe.

> and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?

Going back to Imperial would mean teaching a whole generation, or more,
to think in multiple Bases, rather than in just Base 10. I doubt many
could cope with what we used to take in our stride.


--
--

Colin Bignell

[R. Mark Clayton]

On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 17:43:37 UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
> On 18/07/2018 14:26, Alasdair X wrote:
> > When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms,
>
> We first considered metrication in 1818. The Metrication Board was set
> up in 1969, but metric weights for goods did not become mandatory until
> the year 2000. Even so, Imperial weights can still be used as
> supplementary units.
>
> > standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters
>
> Imperial and metric copper tube are different sizes, as you would know
> if you have ever tried to upgrade a plumbing system from before about
> the mid-1960s. It was an economic decision to stop using a different
> system from the rest of Europe.

Although interestingly taps in say France have BSP sizes and threads!

[Roland Perry]

In message <3qOdnTudgoGo89LG...@giganews.com>, at 17:43:33
on Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Nightjar <c...@bignell.me.uk> remarked:

>Even if you can convert metric to Imperial easily, it is not obvious
>that a pipe that measures 89mm OD is actually a 3 inch pipe.

That's an odd one, 89mm is almost exactly 3.5"
--
Roland Perry

[newshound]

Have just bought some 1/4 BSW wingnuts on eBay for an American barbecue
(because I want to make the "side tables" removable without tools for
easier storage). I *really* don't want to go back, though.

[Harry Bloomfield]

Alasdair X explained on 18/07/2018 :

> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from
> pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from
> inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric
> system.

Oh, I hope not - it was the one good thing we got from the EU :oÞ

[Harry Bloomfield]

Jethro_uk expressed precisely :
> I'd support a reverse of metrication only if it was a package deal with
> £sd. That would scare the kids.

Scare them, it would scare me and spent years using it - it was
horrible. Then there were the guineas(sp).

[Roland Perry]

In message <pint94$5mm$1...@dont-email.me>, at 18:26:59 on Wed, 18 Jul
2018, Harry Bloomfield <harry...@NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk> remarked:

>it was the one good thing we got from the EU

<meme> What did the EU ever do for us...

[Although in this case it probably wasn't them at all]
--
Roland Perry

[Serena Blanchflower]

But then, come the winter, they will switch to Centigrade, because -1
degree sounds more impressive than 31 degrees.

--
Best wishes, Serena
As I hurtled through space, one thought kept crossing my mind - every
part of this rocket was supplied by the lowest bidder. (John Glenn)

[Handsome Jack]

Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted

>Some Quitlings have proposed going back to imperial measurements
>as a "benefit" of Brexit,

Really, who?


--
Jack

[Tosspot]

On 2018-07-18 15:32, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 15:02:00 +0100, TTman wrote:
>
>> On 18/07/2018 14:26, Alasdair X wrote:
>>> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went
>>> from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went
>>> from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the
>>> metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our
>>> old imperial measures or stick with metric?
>>>
>> No. the UK is metric end of...
>

> Except for pints and miles ...

And strangely...fish...well, sharks

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dont-panic-but-british-sharks-are-getting-bigger-ndchncdb6

It's behind a paywall, but you get the idea.

Which is borne out by

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-40804771

What is it with fisher-non-gender-specific-people being 40 years behind
the times <cough> ?

[TMS320]

On 18/07/18 15:32, Jethro_uk wrote:

> If we were to be thrust back into the dark ages of imperial, I'd
> manage except for temperature. I still can't work or think in
> Fahrenheit.

Ditto and anything smaller than an inch has to be in millimetres. (I
wish it was easier to find a steel tape measure metric down both edges.)

> I'd support a reverse of metrication only if it was a package deal
> with £sd. That would scare the kids.

How about just £s? No point having d anymore.

[TMS320]

I hope not. Illogical and confusing. New Zealand is a long way away but
they are more metric than us, even measuring roads in kilometres.

[Harry Bloomfield]

TMS320 formulated the question :

> How about just £s? No point having d anymore.

No, we could manage with just the £ and the d's, how about 100 d's to
the pound? That would make the UK currency easy to use lol

[s.gru...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 14:30:11 UTC+1, Alasdair X wrote:
> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?

metrification has started before the UK has joined the EU (AFAIK).
While I'm aware that half of brexiteers live in the past of "mighty britain" even they- I somehow believe- aren't that stupid to reverse to the imperial system.

simon

[Peter Parry]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:32:47 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

>Except for pints and miles ...

and feet as in flight levels and altitude.

[ingram....@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 9:34:28 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

> Ditto and anything smaller than an inch has to be in millimetres. (I
> wish it was easier to find a steel tape measure metric down both edges.)

I buy mine in France!

nib

[TTman]

Are you sure about that ????? god fobid :)

[Harry Bloomfield]

After serious thinking Jethro_uk wrote :
> It's 240 ds to the pound - as indeed I'm sure you know.

Did you not notice the lol at the end?

[Tim Woodall]

On 2018-07-18, Harry Bloomfield <harry...@NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> TMS320 formulated the question :

>> How about just ?s? No point having d anymore.
>
> No, we could manage with just the ? and the d's, how about 100 d's to

> the pound? That would make the UK currency easy to use lol

Referendum: Lsd or euro?

The young will obviously vote for LSD.
The middle aged will remember 'the war on drugs' and vote for the euro
The aged will fondly remember long multiplication and will still be
reminising about the times 'when men were real men, women were property,
and children respected their elders' and will demand a return to better
times.

[Sara Merriman]

In article <3qOdnTudgoGo89LG...@giganews.com>, Nightjar

<c...@bignell.me.uk> wrote:

>
> Going back to Imperial would mean teaching a whole generation, or more,
> to think in multiple Bases, rather than in just Base 10. I doubt many
> could cope with what we used to take in our stride.

I always thought that was A Good Thing about pre-decimalisation - when
it was around you all the time it was easy. I don't remember any of the
kids in my primary school (1960s) having a problem swapping bases. I
doubt if any of us considered that that what was what we were doing of
course, it was just money, or sweets or whatever.

[Sara Merriman]

In article <HVM5tgo9...@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry

Would'OD' mean outside diameter? Just a thought.

[Sara Merriman]

In article <pinteu$762$1...@dont-email.me>, Harry Bloomfield

<harry...@NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> Jethro_uk expressed precisely :
> > I'd support a reverse of metrication only if it was a package deal with

> > Łsd. That would scare the kids.

>
> Scare them, it would scare me and spent years using it - it was
> horrible. Then there were the guineas(sp).

I think horses are still sold in guineas. Those extra shillings add up.

[Roland Perry]

In message <190720180824389802%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk>, at
08:24:38 on Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Sara Merriman
<sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:

>> >Even if you can convert metric to Imperial easily, it is not obvious
>> >that a pipe that measures 89mm OD is actually a 3 inch pipe.
>>
>> That's an odd one, 89mm is almost exactly 3.5"
>
>Would'OD' mean outside diameter? Just a thought.

But are pipes sold on the inside diameter? Quite a thick-walled pipe if
3.5" OD equals 3" ID though.
--
Roland Perry

[Andy Burns]

Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <190720180824389802%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk>, at
> 08:24:38 on Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Sara Merriman
> <sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>> >Even if you can convert metric to Imperial easily, it is not obvious
>>> >that a pipe that measures 89mm OD is actually a 3 inch pipe.
>>>
>>> That's an odd one, 89mm is almost exactly 3.5"
>>
>> Would'OD' mean outside diameter? Just a thought.
>
> But are pipes sold on the inside diameter?

Yes pipes are specced by ID, tubes by OD (which is why imperial 1/2"
copper and metric 15mm copper turn out to be so close that it usually
doesn't matter).

[Nightjar]

In calculating fluid flow, particularly liquids, the bore is far more
important than the outside diameter.

The sizing goes back to the 19th century, when pipes under 3" bore were
made of wrought iron and 3" and above cast iron. The wall thickness had
to be enough for them to retain the strength to resist internal pressure
when a thread was cut on the outside - hence a quarter inch wall on 3"
pipe. The thread used was later standardised as British Standard Pipe
Thread and the size of that still determines the outside diameter of
pressure pipes today. Steel is stronger than cast iron, so the bore of a
standard nominal 3" pipe is about 78mm.

--
--

Colin Bignell

[Tim Woodall]

First 50p to replace the 10s note was 1968. Ditto 10p for the florin and
5p for the shilling.

And the '99p' shops will be renamed 'nineteen shillings eleven pence three
farthings' shops and the implicit increase in prices will save all the
highstreet problems.

[Roland Perry]

In message <190720180823537141%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk>, at
08:23:53 on Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Sara Merriman
<sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:

>> Going back to Imperial would mean teaching a whole generation, or more,
>> to think in multiple Bases, rather than in just Base 10. I doubt many
>> could cope with what we used to take in our stride.
>
>I always thought that was A Good Thing about pre-decimalisation - when
>it was around you all the time it was easy. I don't remember any of the
>kids in my primary school (1960s) having a problem swapping bases.

My mother worked for a while in the accounts department f a large firm,
totally up invoices. The mechanical calculators they used worked only in
decimal, so every line item was mentally 'decimalised' and then the
total put back into LSD. I'm told this was completely automatic once you
got the hang of it, in the same way that touch-typing or taking
shorthand is. The modern equivalent is predictive texting without
looking at the screen, I suppose.

Another form of base-conversion: at school I could touch type punched
cards on a hand-punch without looking or thinking about the conversion
from the character-set to the card code.
--
Roland Perry

[Janet]

In article <pip9oh$v9f$2...@dont-email.me>, jeth...@hotmailbin.com
says...

>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 21:53:46 +0100, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
>
> > No, we could manage with just the £ and the d's, how about 100 d's to
> > the pound? That would make the UK currency easy to use lol
>

> It's 240 ds to the pound - as indeed I'm sure you know.

woosh

Janet

[FMurtz]

Alasdair X wrote:
> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?
>

We in Australia are not leaving the EU and we cope with metrics.

[Roland Perry]

In message <Vc-dnWsMy5bx183G...@giganews.com>, at 09:23:09
on Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Nightjar <c...@bignell.me.uk> remarked:

>On 19/07/2018 08:41, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <190720180824389802%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk>, at
>>08:24:38 on Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Sara Merriman
>><sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>> >Even if you can convert metric to Imperial easily, it is not
>>>> >obvious
>>>> >that a pipe that measures 89mm OD is actually a 3 inch pipe.
>>>>
>>>> That's an odd one, 89mm is almost exactly 3.5"
>>>
>>> Would'OD' mean outside diameter? Just a thought.
>> But are pipes sold on the inside diameter? Quite a thick-walled pipe
>>if 3.5" OD equals 3" ID though.
>
>In calculating fluid flow, particularly liquids, the bore is far more

It puzzles me, therefore, why anyone would describe a pipe as 89mm OD if
it's actually the ID which matters.

>The sizing goes back to the 19th century, when pipes under 3" bore were
>made of wrought iron and 3" and above cast iron. The wall thickness had
>to be enough for them to retain the strength to resist internal
>pressure when a thread was cut on the outside - hence a quarter inch
>wall on 3" pipe. The thread used was later standardised as British
>Standard Pipe Thread and the size of that still determines the outside
>diameter of pressure pipes today. Steel is stronger than cast iron, so
>the bore of a standard nominal 3" pipe is about 78mm.

--

Roland Perry

[Clive Arthur]

On 19/07/2018 07:06, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 21:53:46 +0100, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
>

>> No, we could manage with just the £ and the d's, how about 100 d's to
>> the pound? That would make the UK currency easy to use lol
>

> It's 240 ds to the pound - as indeed I'm sure you know.
>

And that would weigh 5 lb.

Cheers
--
Clive

[Clive Arthur]

On 18/07/2018 20:09, s.gru...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

>
> metrification has started before the UK has joined the EU (AFAIK).
>

> simon
>

The inch went 'metric' in July 1959.

Cheers
--
Clive

[Norman Wells]

On 19/07/2018 12:33, Clive Arthur wrote:
> On 18/07/2018 20:09, s.gru...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> metrification has started before the UK has joined the EU (AFAIK).
>

> The inch went 'metric' in July 1959.

And has remained at 25.4 millimetres ever since.

Hoorah for metrification and the stability the EU has brought to the inch!

[Jon Ribbens]

Here's two examples: a government minister and a national newspaper
columnist.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/return-pounds-ounces-britain-might-allow-firms-use-imperial/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/01/now-sovereign-nation-must-bring-back-imperial-units/

[Nightjar]

On 19/07/2018 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
....

> It puzzles me, therefore, why anyone would describe a pipe as 89mm OD if

> it's actually the ID which matters...

The bore is important to engineers, doing fluid flow calculations.
Plumbers often only have access to the outside when buying accessories.
It is increasingly rare for plumbers to know that a pipe measuring 3.5"
on the outside should be described as a 3 inch pipe. Hence, they often
give the OD in millimetres. It is particularly difficult to know what
they want if they have measured the OD with a tape measure and rounded
to the nearest 5mm.


--
--

Colin Bignell

[Roland Perry]

In message <dpudnaxyKu6oVc3G...@giganews.com>, at 18:19:50

on Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Nightjar <c...@bignell.me.uk> remarked:

>On 19/07/2018 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>....
>> It puzzles me, therefore, why anyone would describe a pipe as 89mm OD
>>if it's actually the ID which matters...
>
>The bore is important to engineers, doing fluid flow calculations.

Therefore the pipe should be described by its ID.

>Plumbers often only have access to the outside when buying accessories.
>It is increasingly rare for plumbers to know that a pipe measuring 3.5"
>on the outside should be described as a 3 inch pipe.

It must be very confusing for them for people to call it 89mm then.

What about thin-walled such as plastic drainpipes.

>Hence, they often give the OD in millimetres. It is particularly
>difficult to know what they want if they have measured the OD with a
>tape measure and rounded to the nearest 5mm.

I wouldn't encourage that amount of rounding in any event.
--
Roland Perry

[Dean Jackson]

On 18/07/2018 14:26, Alasdair X wrote:
> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?
>

It would confuse the children and the under 50's
D.J.

[Martin Harran]

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:36:08 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
<jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:

>On 2018-07-18, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:38:45 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <pinj2f$v9f$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:32:47 on Wed, 18 Jul
>>> 2018, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> remarked:
>>>>If we were to be thrust back into the dark ages of imperial, I'd manage
>>>>except for temperature. I still can't work or think in Fahrenheit.
>>>
>>> I struggle with centigrade when it's in a weather forecast.
>>
>> It's all I can understand. BBC local radio can be really annoying when
>> they insist on *only* using F for weather.
>
>Indeed, they say ridiculous things like "the temperature will be
>ninety degrees", which if true would obviously mean we'd all be dead.

Depends on the humidity, I've often been in a sauna at 90 C and I'm
not dead yet ;)

[NeedHelp]

On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 15:39:05 UTC+1, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> Some Quitlings have proposed going back to imperial measurements

> as a "benefit" of Brexit, and given the current political climate
> where something being utter nonsense doesn't prevent it from being
> government policy, I wouldn't rule it out. Some of them have even
> suggested going back to pre-decimal currency...

Personally, I wish we used SI units, so speed was in metres/s, rather than km/hour or miles/hour, energy was in joules, rather than kWh etc.

I think imperial would be a retrograde step, and I can't see it happening, but never can I see universal use of SI units in my lifetime.

[Bobkoytc]

On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 14:30:11 UTC+1, Alasdair X wrote:
> When the UK joined the European Community in 1972, all meaurements went from pounds and ounces to grams and kilograms, standard pipe sizes went from inches to millimeters and other things too were converted to the metric system. Now that we are leaving the EU, will we revert to our old imperial measures or stick with metric?

Wrong. Metrication started in the UK before we joined the EU and it was nothing to do with it.
I remember having to make the switch-over in the 1960's as an engineering apprentice.
Also, my house was built in 1965 and the construction is all metric.

So, the change had nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with coming in to line with the rest of the world (except USA). Australia, New Zealand and Canada did it at the same time. No EU influence there.

It's just the Brexiteers seem to have jumped on the issue as a drum to beat, not letting the actual facts get in their way.

[Roland Perry]

In message <2443c2a6-f9e5-4111...@googlegroups.com>, at
09:52:46 on Sun, 29 Jul 2018, Bobkoytc <bobk...@googlemail.com>
remarked:

To be fair, I think (some) Brexiteers resent the metrication of consumer
items like petrol, milk and traffic signs; although we opted out of one
of those, and another is half-and-half.
--
Roland Perry

[Handsome Jack]

Bobkoytc <bobk...@googlemail.com> posted

In fact it was an EU directive that prevented traders advertising their
goods in non-metric measures, with certain exceptions.

And also, brexiteers have *not* jumped on the issue. This thread was
started by a *Remainer*. When challenged, he was able to cite *one*
Brexiteer (a newspaper columnist) who wanted to go back to imperial. The
issue was not even mentioned in the referendum campaign IIRC.

But don't let the *true* actual facts get in your way.

--
Jack

[lordgnome]

On 29/07/2018 18:43, Handsome Jack wrote:
> Bobkoytc <bobk...@googlemail.com> posted

> In fact it was an EU directive that prevented traders advertising their
> goods in non-metric measures, with certain exceptions.
>
> And also, brexiteers have *not* jumped on the issue. This thread was
> started by a *Remainer*. When challenged, he was able to cite *one*
> Brexiteer (a newspaper columnist) who wanted to go back to imperial. The
> issue was not even mentioned in the referendum campaign IIRC.
>
> But don't let the *true* actual facts get in your way.
>

Very true. For some reason although perfectly happy to use metric on
mechanical or electrical work, I still like to do woodwork in imperial.
You can still ask for a 4x2 timber at a timber suppliers, although what
you get will be some metric approximation!

Les.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2018-07-29, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> In fact it was an EU directive that prevented traders advertising their
> goods in non-metric measures, with certain exceptions.
>
> And also, brexiteers have *not* jumped on the issue. This thread was
> started by a *Remainer*. When challenged, he was able to cite *one*
> Brexiteer (a newspaper columnist) who wanted to go back to imperial. The
> issue was not even mentioned in the referendum campaign IIRC.
>
> But don't let the *true* actual facts get in your way.

It's ironic you say that, given that everything you just said is false.

There is no EU directive that has ever prevented traders advertising
their goods in non-metric measures. Brexiters *have* jumped on the
issue, as per the references you have already seen. The thread was
started by "Alasdair X", and I have seen nothing to suggest he is a
Remainer. It was I, not he, who you challenged about going back to
imperial units. I gave you two, not one, references, which included
a national newspaper columnist and a senior government minister.
Nobody claimed the issue was mentioned in the referendum campaign.

But don't let the facts get in your way.

[tim...]

"Jethro_uk" <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote in message
news:pjn91h$539$9...@dont-email.me...

> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:40:17 +0000, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>
>> There is no EU directive that has ever prevented traders advertising
>> their goods in non-metric measures
>

> Farmers markets and the like almost invariably do.

IME most farmer's markets break the law by not advertising prices on loose
goods.

how they get away with it, I have no idea.

tim

[Handsome Jack]

Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted

>On 2018-07-29, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> In fact it was an EU directive that prevented traders advertising their
>> goods in non-metric measures, with certain exceptions.
>>
>> And also, brexiteers have *not* jumped on the issue. This thread was
>> started by a *Remainer*. When challenged, he was able to cite *one*
>> Brexiteer (a newspaper columnist) who wanted to go back to imperial. The
>> issue was not even mentioned in the referendum campaign IIRC.
>>
>> But don't let the *true* actual facts get in your way.
>
>It's ironic you say that, given that everything you just said is false.
>
>There is no EU directive that has ever prevented traders advertising
>their goods in non-metric measures.

An EU directive was adopted requiring traders to sell their goods in
metric measures, with certain exceptions. That's near enough.

>Brexiters *have* jumped on the
>issue, as per the references you have already seen. The thread was
>started by "Alasdair X", and I have seen nothing to suggest he is a
>Remainer. It was I, not he, who you challenged about going back to
>imperial units.

True. I didn't really pay much attention to it before your post, though.

>I gave you two, not one, references, which included
>a national newspaper columnist and a senior government minister.

But one of your references was Andrea Leadsom saying “Once we have
left the EU, we will get the opportunity to look at how we can change
rules that will be better for the United Kingdom and whether that’s on
weights and measures or issues like teaspoons, those are things for the
future.”

Whatever that means, it doesn't mean she supported "going back to
imperial measurements" which was what you claimed.

>Nobody claimed the issue was mentioned in the referendum campaign.

But since it wasn't mentioned in the campaign, that does tend to show
that Brexiters didn't "jump on the issue as a drum to beat", in my
opinion. I'd say that for 99 per cent of them it is utterly irrelevant.

--
Jack

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2018-07-31, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted

>>It's ironic you say that, given that everything you just said is false.
>>
>>There is no EU directive that has ever prevented traders advertising
>>their goods in non-metric measures.
>
> An EU directive was adopted requiring traders to sell their goods in
> metric measures, with certain exceptions. That's near enough.

It's not even close. You claimed they were prevented, they were and
are not prevented.

>>I gave you two, not one, references, which included
>>a national newspaper columnist and a senior government minister.
>
> But one of your references was Andrea Leadsom saying “Once we have
> left the EU, we will get the opportunity to look at how we can change
> rules that will be better for the United Kingdom and whether that’s on
> weights and measures or issues like teaspoons, those are things for the
> future.”
>
> Whatever that means, it doesn't mean she supported "going back to
> imperial measurements" which was what you claimed.

I doubt that government ministers frequently raise proposals with
the intention that nobody think they might support those proposals.

Also, bear in mind that my claim was "some Quitlings", not "chief
Quitlings". It is clear that my claim was, if anything, understated:

https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/fb696aa0-6e8e-11e6-87b8-005056900101/question/14aefd90-6e8f-11e6-87b8-005056900101/politics

>>Nobody claimed the issue was mentioned in the referendum campaign.
>
> But since it wasn't mentioned in the campaign, that does tend to show
> that Brexiters didn't "jump on the issue as a drum to beat", in my
> opinion. I'd say that for 99 per cent of them it is utterly irrelevant.

Nobody claimed they "jumped on it as a drum to beat" during the
referendum campaign. Also your 99% supposition is wildly wrong - see
the yougov link above.

[kat]

On 01/08/2018 13:19, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2018-07-31, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted
>>> It's ironic you say that, given that everything you just said is false.
>>>
>>> There is no EU directive that has ever prevented traders advertising
>>> their goods in non-metric measures.
>>
>> An EU directive was adopted requiring traders to sell their goods in
>> metric measures, with certain exceptions. That's near enough.
>
> It's not even close. You claimed they were prevented, they were and
> are not prevented.
>

This is surely true, I can buy many things loose either way, but, can you tell
me where I can buy a half pound block of butter?

I am perfectly capable of cooking using either set of measurements, as despite
my age I grew up using both at school, but it is so much easier to cut 8 oz
into 8 separate ounces then to divide 250 grams into 10. Or worse, if my
ancient recipe book is all imperial, into almost 9.


--
kat
>^..^<

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2018-08-02, kat <little...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/08/2018 13:19, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> It's not even close. You claimed they were prevented, they were and
>> are not prevented.
>
> This is surely true, I can buy many things loose either way, but,
> can you tell me where I can buy a half pound block of butter?

Pretty much anywhere that will sell you butter in the amount you
choose.

I don't know what a "half pound" is, but I can tell you where you can
buy 8.8oz of butter if that helps?

> I am perfectly capable of cooking using either set of measurements,
> as despite my age I grew up using both at school, but it is so much
> easier to cut 8 oz into 8 separate ounces then to divide 250 grams
> into 10. Or worse, if my ancient recipe book is all imperial, into
> almost 9.

Obviously, recipe books that were made in imperial may well be easier
to use with imperial amounts. I would think 9 is pretty easy actually
though, just cut into 3 pieces both ways (like a noughts-and-crosses
board).

[Sara Merriman]

In article <pjurnm$539$3...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 11:35:11 +0000, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>
> > Obviously, recipe books that were made in imperial may well be easier to
> > use with imperial amounts. I would think 9 is pretty easy actually
> > though,
> > just cut into 3 pieces both ways (like a noughts-and-crosses board).
>

> I have a lot of time for the US "cups" system ...

A cup of butter is tricky. Unless it's melted.

[Sara Merriman]

In article <pjurmn$539$3...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 10:42:18 +0100, kat wrote:
>
> > On 01/08/2018 13:19, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> >> [quoted text muted]

> >
> > This is surely true, I can buy many things loose either way, but, can
> > you tell me where I can buy a half pound block of butter?
>

> Anywhere that sells butter ? It's a handy stick phrase passed from
> generation to generation (on coming to the UK my Dad had to learn it when
> buying coffee :) ). The fact that under the counter (so to speak) the
> assistant gives you around 220g is neither here nor there.
>
I grew up with imperial weights and find the new fangled stuff
annoying. I use it, but it's not so immediately obvious to me.

It look me ages to realise a recipe that used 500g of flour and 300ml
of water was actually much the same as a pound one of and a pint of the
other. It made much more sense to me then.

I guess I'm part of a dying breed.

[Sara Merriman]

In article <pjutkp$539$3...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 13:23:27 +0100, Sara Merriman wrote:
>
> > It look me ages to realise a recipe that used 500g of flour and 300ml of
> > water was actually much the same as a pound one of and a pint of the
> > other. It made much more sense to me then.
>

> A little "gotcha" in UK recipes is sloppy/incorrect Imperial-metric
> conversions ... 300ml is *not* "half a pint", and depending what you are
> making, that can have quite an effect on the finished article.

For what I was making, 'about this much' was good enough.

[Peter Parry]

On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:33:17 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

>*shrug*
>
>It's what they use.

In American recipes butter is usually measured in "sticks", one stick
is about 1 cup US (which of course differs from the Australian metric
cup which in turn is not the same as the Eurocup.) So one cup of
butter in the USA weighs about 227g. In Australia it weighs 250g and
in the UK 225g.

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to chose
from.

[lordgnome]

On 02/08/2018 13:32, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 13:23:27 +0100, Sara Merriman wrote:
>

>> It look me ages to realise a recipe that used 500g of flour and 300ml of
>> water was actually much the same as a pound one of and a pint of the
>> other. It made much more sense to me then.
>

> A little "gotcha" in UK recipes is sloppy/incorrect Imperial-metric
> conversions ... 300ml is *not* "half a pint", and depending what you are
> making, that can have quite an effect on the finished article.
>

Why do metric conversions always seem to be rounded down (unlike the
change to decimal currency when everything was rounded up)? Metrication
defies the laws of physics. Timber of a lesser dimension can suddenly
sustain a higher load, cable can suddenly carry more current, etc.

Les.

[kat]

I have never seen a square block of butter, and that isn't so easy with an oblong!

--
kat
>^..^<

[kat]

On 02/08/2018 12:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 10:42:18 +0100, kat wrote:
>

>> On 01/08/2018 13:19, Jon Ribbens wrote:

>>> [quoted text muted]

>>
>> This is surely true, I can buy many things loose either way, but, can
>> you tell me where I can buy a half pound block of butter?
>

> Anywhere that sells butter ? It's a handy stick phrase passed from
> generation to generation (on coming to the UK my Dad had to learn it when
> buying coffee :) ). The fact that under the counter (so to speak) the
> assistant gives you around 220g is neither here nor there.
>

Loose butter?

--
kat
>^..^<

[kat]

On 02/08/2018 13:33, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 13:19:23 +0100, Sara Merriman wrote:
>

> *shrug*
>
> It's what they use.
>

I thought they used "sticks" of butter, and cups of flour.

--
kat
>^..^<

[Roland Perry]

In message <fsh7l1...@mid.individual.net>, at 21:25:03 on Thu, 2 Aug
2018, kat <little...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> This is surely true, I can buy many things loose either way, but, can
>>> you tell me where I can buy a half pound block of butter?
>> Anywhere that sells butter ? It's a handy stick phrase passed from
>> generation to generation (on coming to the UK my Dad had to learn it when
>> buying coffee :) ). The fact that under the counter (so to speak) the
>> assistant gives you around 220g is neither here nor there.
>
>Loose butter?

I can remember grocers shops where butter was sold loose and the
assistant's skill was in scooping up just the right amount, and then
using butter paddles to swiftly knock it into a brick shape.

[nine sections]

>I have never seen a square block of butter, and that isn't so easy with
>an oblong!

It's no more difficult to cut a rectangle into nine equal sizes with
four cuts, than it is a square.
--
Roland Perry

[kat]

On 03/08/2018 07:47, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <fsh7l1...@mid.individual.net>, at 21:25:03 on Thu, 2 Aug 2018,
> kat <little...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>> This is surely true, I can buy many things loose either way, but, can
>>>> you tell me where I can buy a half pound block of butter?
>>>  Anywhere that sells butter ? It's a handy stick phrase passed from
>>> generation to generation (on coming to the UK my Dad had to learn it when
>>> buying coffee :) ). The fact that under the counter (so to speak) the
>>> assistant gives you around 220g is neither here nor there.
>>
>> Loose butter?
>
> I can remember grocers shops where butter was sold loose and the assistant's
> skill was in scooping up just the right amount, and then using butter paddles to
> swiftly knock it into a brick shape.
>

A nice memory - I don't have it. But I anted to know where i could buy a half
pound of butter now.

> [nine sections]
>
> >I have never seen a square block of butter, and that isn't so easy with >an
> oblong!
>
> It's no more difficult to cut a rectangle into nine equal sizes with four cuts,
> than it is a square.

I find it a bit narrow along one side.
--
kat
>^..^<

[Robin]

On 03/08/2018 08:27, kat wrote:
<snip>

>
> A nice memory - I don't have it.  But I anted to know where i could buy
> a half pound of butter now.
>

[ TRIGGER WARNING: this post contains references to law :) ]

AFAICS shops - eg Safeway - in the USA still stock a range at that
weight but, before you send a maid or footman with a cool-box, you may
wish to check the legal position as ISTR personal imports of dairy
products from outside the EU are prohibited.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

[Andy Burns]

Robin wrote:

> kat wrote:
>
>> I [w]anted to know where i could

>> buy a half pound of butter now.
>

> before you send a maid or footman with a cool-box, you may
> wish to check the legal position as ISTR personal imports of dairy
> products from outside the EU are prohibited.

So import from Eire
<https://www.tesco.ie/groceries/Product/Details/?id=268867214>

[Robin]

That's 227g; kat specified half a pound; may want precision - or be
gramme-intolerant.

[kat]

I am not in the least gramme intolerant, 226.5 would be nearer but that would do.

Do you think RyanAir allow cool boxes full of butter as hand luggage?

--
kat
>^..^<

[kat]

On 03/08/2018 10:58, Jethro_uk wrote:

> I think it depends what the original recipe was measured in ? (The idea
> of recipes being repeated converted leading to a knicker-elastic ruler
> effect seems highly likely).
>
> Weren't measurements originally taken from natural - and universal -
> objects ?
>

Foot : 12 inches, the length of the average man's foot. Yard: A yard was
originally the length of a man's belt or girdle, as it was called. In the 12th
century, King Henry I of England fixed the yard as the distance from his nose to
the thumb of his out-stretched arm. Today it is 36 inches.

--
kat
>^..^<

[Andy Burns]

kat wrote:

> Do you think RyanAir allow cool boxes full of butter as hand luggage?

Better hope the X-ray signature of butter is significantly different
from marzipan ...

[Ian Jackson]

In message <fsiqr2...@mid.individual.net>, kat
<little...@hotmail.com> writes

Un pouce (inch) - the distance from the tip of the thumb to the knuckle
joint.

Acre - the typical area that could be ploughed in one day with a yoke of
oxen pulling a wooden plough.
--
Ian

[Ian Jackson]

In message <pk1gt4$539$5...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> writes

>*average* mans foot ?
>
>Sounds like a load of tosh to me. Especially as that is "1 foot" and
>doesn't explain the division into 12. Of course *everything* in imperial
>was divided into 12. Except where it wasn't (gallons, shillings to the
>Pound etc).
>
>maybe the *largest* mans foot length, which is not quite the same ...

Maybe the guy who finalised the size of a foot was 'better-endowed' than
your average man - or could it be that he was only boasting?
--
Ian

[Clive Page]

On 03/08/2018 15:43, Ian Jackson wrote:

> Maybe the guy who finalised the size of a foot was 'better-endowed' than your average man - or could it be that he was only boasting?

Or was it like the definition of horse-power: the story is that James Watt measured the power output of a horse that he had to hand, but thought that it was a bit feebler than a "typical" horse, so multiplied the output by 1.5 when defining one horse-power.

--
Clive Page

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2018-08-01, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
> On 2018-07-31, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted

>>>I gave you two, not one, references, which included
>>>a national newspaper columnist and a senior government minister.
>>
>> But one of your references was Andrea Leadsom saying “Once we have
>> left the EU, we will get the opportunity to look at how we can change
>> rules that will be better for the United Kingdom and whether that’s on
>> weights and measures or issues like teaspoons, those are things for the
>> future.”
>>
>> Whatever that means, it doesn't mean she supported "going back to
>> imperial measurements" which was what you claimed.
>
> I doubt that government ministers frequently raise proposals with
> the intention that nobody think they might support those proposals.

I don't want to say "I told you so"*, but I told you so:

"UK pledges to restore pounds and ounces as Brexit benefit"
https://www.ft.com/content/23569cd6-edc1-475e-956a-53ffe5ac5f1c

We truly have the stupidest possible government.


* I do want to say "I told you so".

[Norman Wells]

It's not 'restoring' them in the sense that that's what we must use.
It's restoring a freedom to be able to use them if we wish.

This distinction seems to be one that sad Remainers just cannot grasp.

[JNugent]

The UK has never abandoned imperial measures. We still deal in pints,
miles and gallons (not least within the calculation of miles per gallon).

Given a choice (yes, we know that the word *is* anathema to some), the
UK's *population*, taken as a whole, would never have willingly adopted
millimetres, litres and grammes. And in particular, never to the extent
of making the selling of five pounds of King Edwards (or four ounces of
Pear Drops) a criminal offence, which must be one of the stupidest laws
ever to be placed on the statute book.

But what does the population matter, eh?

[The Todal]

But the EU did not, in the event, compel us to abandon imperial measures.

But what does the truth matter, eh?

[Roger Hayter]

On 17 Sep 2021 at 11:40:41 BST, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>

We might consider suggesting Priti Patel bring back burning witches. This
might appeal to the misogyny of the younger under-unemployed in the "red wall"
of the Northeast, and to the more elderly Brexit demographic in the South.


--
Roger Hayter

[billy bookcase]

"JNugent" <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:iqjbph...@mid.individual.net...

> Given a choice (yes, we know that the word *is* anathema to some), the UK's
> *population*, taken as a whole, would never have willingly adopted millimetres, litres
> and grammes. And in particular, never to the extent of making the selling of five
> pounds of King Edwards (or four ounces of Pear Drops) a criminal offence, which must be
> one of the stupidest laws ever to be placed on the statute book.
>
> But what does the population matter, eh?

The metric system was officially adopted in the UK in 1965 and presumably
was taught in schools from that date. So that anyone born after say 1961
will be perfectly familiar with the metric system.

So the population you're actually referring to are presumably those born prior to
1961. Those aged 60 or over.

Sound familiar ?


bb

[JNugent]

It really doesn't matter who decided on it (it was the Blair government
of 1997). The decision was made and the usual suspects supported it,
despite the well-reported misgivings and opposition of a large section
of the population.

This is about whether the UK *should* have abandoned (some) of the
imperial measures system and even made its use a criminal offence
(absolutely *unbelievable*!). Of course, there were people arguing for
all that even before the UK's government decided that the UK would join
the Common Market. But they should not have prevailed.

I, of course, am of a generation who learned both systems at primary school.

[JNugent]

On 17/09/2021 12:53 pm, billy bookcase wrote:

> "JNugent" <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>> Given a choice (yes, we know that the word *is* anathema to some), the UK's
>> *population*, taken as a whole, would never have willingly adopted millimetres, litres
>> and grammes. And in particular, never to the extent of making the selling of five
>> pounds of King Edwards (or four ounces of Pear Drops) a criminal offence, which must be
>> one of the stupidest laws ever to be placed on the statute book.
>> But what does the population matter, eh?
>
> The metric system was officially adopted in the UK in 1965 and presumably
> was taught in schools from that date. So that anyone born after say 1961
> will be perfectly familiar with the metric system.

It was taught long before 1965.

Not that it matters much.

> So the population you're actually referring to are presumably those born prior to
> 1961. Those aged 60 or over.

I didn't even know that it is a criminal offence for a teacher to teach
pounds, ounces, hundredweights, furlongs, chains, yards, feet, inches,
gallons, quarts and pints but take your word for it. It's obviously
worse than we knew and in urgent need of reform.

> Sound familiar ?

The law making the selling vegetables by the pound a *criminal* offence
was enacted under the Blair government. Prosecutions started in 2000.

[Roland Perry]

In message <iqjgp8...@mid.individual.net>, at 13:42:16 on Fri, 17
Sep 2021, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>I didn't even know that it is a criminal offence for a teacher to teach
>pounds, ounces, hundredweights, furlongs, chains, yards, feet, inches,
>gallons, quarts and pints but take your word for it. It's obviously
>worse than we knew and in urgent need of reform.

You forgot Rods, Poles and Perches (in history lessons if nothing else).

But we still run horse races in furlongs, and the railways still measure
all their distances in [miles and] chains. So the march of metrification
is much exaggerated.

ps. I have a surveyor's chain, and was taught how to use it at
University in the 70's. The rod is also a surveyor's measure, of
course, but long gone are the days surveyors could only afford one
rod, and had to keep hand-over-handing it.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 17/09/2021 01:58 pm, Roland Perry wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>
>> I didn't even know that it is a criminal offence for a teacher to
>> teach pounds, ounces, hundredweights, furlongs, chains, yards, feet,
>> inches, gallons, quarts and pints but take your word for it. It's
>> obviously worse than we knew and in urgent need of reform.
>
> You forgot Rods, Poles and Perches (in history lessons if nothing else).

They were all mentioned and defined inside the back cover of (some of)
out school exercise-book.

> But we still run horse races in furlongs, and the railways still measure
> all their distances in [miles and] chains. So the march of metrification
> is much exaggerated.

You mean that people *weren't* prosecuted for, and convicted of, the
"crime" of selling fruit and vegetables by the pound?

Was it the Sun wot just made it all up?

[notya...@gmail.com]

I'll bet even most of them could not work out what one stone two pounds and two ounces of potatoes at two shillings and seven pence a pound would cost.

BTW the answer is £5

[notya...@gmail.com]

I don't get this freedom if less scrupulous manufacturers start putting weights or volumes in imperial units and doubtless hiking their prices.

As it happens I was educated in the confusing plethora of Imperial units when aged 6 or 7, but from about 9 or 10 science teaching was in metric units and we were still ten years from joining the EU.

How many roods in an acre?

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2021-09-17, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> You mean that people *weren't* prosecuted for, and convicted of, the
> "crime" of selling fruit and vegetables by the pound?

Correct, nobody has ever been prosecuted for selling things by the
pound.

> Was it the Sun wot just made it all up?

Either that or you didn't understand what it said, it would seem.

[Roland Perry]

In message <3409dc92-76aa-4772...@googlegroups.com>, at
06:21:51 on Fri, 17 Sep 2021, "notya...@gmail.com"
<notya...@gmail.com> remarked:

>On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 12:09:14 UTC+1, Norman Wells wrote:
>> On 17/09/2021 11:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> > On 2018-08-01, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>> >> On 2018-07-31, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >>> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted
>> >>>> I gave you two, not one, references, which included
>> >>>> a national newspaper columnist and a senior government minister.
>> >>>

>> >>> But one of your references was Andrea Leadsom saying “Once we have

>> >>> left the EU, we will get the opportunity to look at how we can change

>> >>> rules that will be better for the United Kingdom and whether that’s on

>> >>> weights and measures or issues like teaspoons, those are things for the

>> >>> future.�

>> >>>
>> >>> Whatever that means, it doesn't mean she supported "going back to
>> >>> imperial measurements" which was what you claimed.
>> >>
>> >> I doubt that government ministers frequently raise proposals with
>> >> the intention that nobody think they might support those proposals.
>> >
>> > I don't want to say "I told you so"*, but I told you so:
>> >
>> > "UK pledges to restore pounds and ounces as Brexit benefit"
>> > https://www.ft.com/content/23569cd6-edc1-475e-956a-53ffe5ac5f1c
>> >
>> > We truly have the stupidest possible government.
>> It's not 'restoring' them in the sense that that's what we must use.
>> It's restoring a freedom to be able to use them if we wish.
>>
>> This distinction seems to be one that sad Remainers just cannot grasp.
>
>I don't get this freedom if less scrupulous manufacturers start putting
>weights or volumes in imperial units and doubtless hiking their prices.
>
>As it happens I was educated in the confusing plethora of Imperial
>units when aged 6 or 7, but from about 9 or 10 science teaching was in
>metric units and we were still ten years from joining the EU.
>
>How many roods in an acre?

Rood is a version of "Rod", and an acre is a chain (four rods) times a
furlong (ten chains). I make that 40.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <96e28abc-d19c-45ca...@googlegroups.com>, at
06:26:54 on Fri, 17 Sep 2021, "notya...@gmail.com"
<notya...@gmail.com> remarked:

>On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 13:25:45 UTC+1, billy bookcase wrote:
>> "JNugent" <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
>> news:iqjbph...@mid.individual.net...
>> > Given a choice (yes, we know that the word *is* anathema to some),
>> >the UK's
>> > *population*, taken as a whole, would never have willingly adopted
>> >millimetres, litres
>> > and grammes. And in particular, never to the extent of making the
>> >selling of five
>> > pounds of King Edwards (or four ounces of Pear Drops) a criminal
>> >offence, which must be
>> > one of the stupidest laws ever to be placed on the statute book.
>> >
>> > But what does the population matter, eh?
>> The metric system was officially adopted in the UK in 1965 and presumably
>> was taught in schools from that date. So that anyone born after say 1961
>> will be perfectly familiar with the metric system.
>>
>> So the population you're actually referring to are presumably those
>>born prior to
>> 1961. Those aged 60 or over.
>>
>> Sound familiar ?
>

>I'll bet even most of them could not work out what one stone two pounds
>and two ounces of potatoes at two shillings and seven pence a pound
>would cost.
>
>BTW the answer is £5

The scales on an old fashioned shop weighing scales are usually in
effect a slide-rule which allows such calculations to be done without
mental arithmetic.

But my mother, whose first job was operating a comptometer that worked
in 1/100ths of a pound Sterling, for the purposes of calculating the
amounts on invoices, had memorised every LSD conversion (where the price
list was in LSD).
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

What do you say the offence was, then?

[Jon Ribbens]

Well you haven't said who you mean. But you might be referring to people
who were convicted of using scales not passed by an inspector as fit for
use contrary to section 11(2) of the Weights and Measures Act 1985, or
maybe people who were convicted of failing to show a price per kilogram
contrary to s4 of the Prices Act 1974 and the Price Marking Order 1999.

[JNugent]

On 17/09/2021 02:21 pm, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, 17 September 2021 at 12:09:14 UTC+1, Norman Wells wrote:
>> On 17/09/2021 11:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>> On 2018-08-01, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>> On 2018-07-31, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> posted
>>>>>> I gave you two, not one, references, which included
>>>>>> a national newspaper columnist and a senior government minister.
>>>>>

>>>>> But one of your references was Andrea Leadsom saying “Once we have

>>>>> left the EU, we will get the opportunity to look at how we can change

>>>>> rules that will be better for the United Kingdom and whether that’s on

>>>>> weights and measures or issues like teaspoons, those are things for the

>>>>> future.â€

>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever that means, it doesn't mean she supported "going back to
>>>>> imperial measurements" which was what you claimed.
>>>>
>>>> I doubt that government ministers frequently raise proposals with
>>>> the intention that nobody think they might support those proposals.
>>>
>>> I don't want to say "I told you so"*, but I told you so:
>>>
>>> "UK pledges to restore pounds and ounces as Brexit benefit"
>>> https://www.ft.com/content/23569cd6-edc1-475e-956a-53ffe5ac5f1c
>>>
>>> We truly have the stupidest possible government.
>> It's not 'restoring' them in the sense that that's what we must use.
>> It's restoring a freedom to be able to use them if we wish.
>>
>> This distinction seems to be one that sad Remainers just cannot grasp.
>
> I don't get this freedom if less scrupulous manufacturers start putting weights or volumes in imperial units and doubtless hiking their prices.
>
> As it happens I was educated in the confusing plethora of Imperial units when aged 6 or 7, but from about 9 or 10 science teaching was in metric units and we were still ten years from joining the EU.
>
> How many roods in an acre?

And how many apples in a barrel of grapes?

[Andy Leighton]

What a curious response?

There is an obvious simple answer to roods in an acre. Roods and acres
used to be commonplace before the switch to hectares (and both are
measures of area). Apples in a barrel of grapes is just nonsense.

--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams

[Norman Wells]

On 17/09/2021 14:42, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2021-09-17, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>> You mean that people *weren't* prosecuted for, and convicted of, the
>> "crime" of selling fruit and vegetables by the pound?
>
> Correct, nobody has ever been prosecuted for selling things by the
> pound.

Except, for example, the unfortunate Mr Thoburn:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jan/16/otherparties.uk

[Norman Wells]

On 17/09/2021 14:51, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <3409dc92-76aa-4772...@googlegroups.com>, at
> 06:21:51 on Fri, 17 Sep 2021, "notya...@gmail.com"

>> As it happens I was educated in the confusing plethora of Imperial
>> units when aged 6 or 7, but from about 9 or 10 science teaching was in
>> metric units and we were still ten years from joining the EU.
>>
>> How many roods in an acre?
>
> Rood is a version of "Rod", and an acre is a chain (four rods) times a
> furlong (ten chains). I make that 40.

Close. You're only a factor 10 out.

[Les. Hayward]

On 17/09/2021 14:21, notya...@gmail.com wrote:

> How many roods in an acre?
>

30 and a quarter square yards = 1 rod, pole or perch.

[Norman Wells]

No it isn't.

It's £2 1s 8d.

[Norman Wells]

On 17/09/2021 14:21, notya...@gmail.com wrote:

There are 4. But why on earth do you think anyone would go back to
using roods as a measure of area when we haven't for a century or more,
ie far longer than the EU has been in existence?

Talk about Project Fear! No matter the ridiculous lengths it has to go
to, it just won't lie down, will it?

[JNugent]

Are you seriously claiming that there is a substantial difference
between the either of those and selling by imperial weight?

"...failing to show a price per kilogram..."...

You couldn't make it up.