Page Type:
Activities:
Scott - Nov 19, 2006 3:36 pm - Hasn't voted
Meters are usually better, but in mountaineering....Most young engineering or science type folk want the USA to change to the metric system. It's the old folk holding us back.
In mountaineering there is only one advantage of using feet. Instead of doing the 8000 meter peaks, hard core peak baggers would have to do the 26,000 foot peaks. This would include Gasherbrum IV, considered possibly the most difficult peak in the world in some circles. I believe it has only been climbed four times.
Vinny - Aug 5, 2013 6:39 pm - Voted 3/10
Re: Meters are usually better, but in mountaineering....Like.
how about a global vote to prove democracy 'works' :)
desainme - Nov 19, 2006 4:21 pm - Voted 10/10
How I stopped worryingand learned to love: One meter =3937/1200 USFt
Bob Sihler - Nov 19, 2006 4:52 pm - Hasn't voted
A little harsh, but easy to see comingIn your defense and despite my own low vote, I have to say that I think some of the very low votes are unfair, but I did have a feeling European members were going to slam this, and they do have their reasons. I see your article as mostly an attempt at being good-humored rather than critical or offensive, but some of the commenters have a very good point in saying your argument isn't based on anything but custom and emotion, which isn't a good way to support a point. Maybe you should make it clearer that this is a light-natured piece, if it is, or rework your arguments if you truly intend to make a case for the foot. And remember--- as great as the 14ers are, they are not even half as high as Everest, and many other Himalaya peaks are nearly twice as high as Colorado's. The rest of the world isn't as impressed with 14,000' as we may be.
Always consider the perspective of your audience when you write or speak. That's advice from an English teacher who also teaches algebra and knows the advantages and disadvantages of using the standard and metric systems.
Corax - Nov 19, 2006 5:24 pm - Voted 4/10
Re: A little harsh, but easy to see comingGood post BSihler.
In your defense and despite my own low vote, I have to say that I think some of the very low votes are unfair, but I did have a feeling European members were going to slam this, and they do have their reasons.
I usually don't comment other people's votes, but as the topic was mentioned I feel I would like to say some words about it.
Yes, I think some of the low votes are unfair.
I think these are based on the opinion on the subject, rather than the quality of the article. That's a distinction some voters seem to fail to see when voting.
A good example of that is when voting on mountain pages. I have sometimes recieved very surprised PMs and E-mails asking me why I have voted 10 on "their little non-interesting peak".
I haven't voted on the peak, I have voted on the quality of the page.
To give you a perfect example: (which came to my mind because the submitter has posted in this thread) Gaizinkalns.
Impressive peak - no.
Good page - yes.
Have a look at the route page and ask yourself if you have seen a more detailed and clear one anywhere on SP.
You can also turn it around. Some very impressive peak´s pages are crap, but still the page recieve extremely high votes because of the peak's status.
I haven't voted on this page and the reason why is because I can't work out how to.
I disagree on most of what's said, but on the other hand the topic itself is interesting.
Hmmm, may vote later.
EDIT: Re-read it and voted.
There's isn't much to agree or disagree on actually.
It's a funny, thought provoking and interesting article.
Bob Sihler - Nov 19, 2006 5:43 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: A little harsh, but easy to see comingI agree with everything you said. Most of the time, I only vote if a page is really good, in my opinion, or if it stinks (or has been under construction for ages). I voted on this one mainly because I found the writing to be so poorly done. We all make errors, but this article is filled with them.
Dmitry Pruss - Nov 19, 2006 7:46 pm - Voted 4/10
I did have a feeling European members were going to slam thisWhy only Europeans? In nearly two decades I've spent in the country, I still haven't figured out how to measure things in feet and inches, like my own height ... it's a silly testament to America's will to snub the rest of the world and do everything its own way. OK, OK, the US is not truly alone with these feet, with Myanmar being the other proud pinnacle of the Imperial system LOL.
Sorry, I think the topic of the article is political rather than cultural, and it is in its core about national superiority. In other words, pure PnP flamebait.
Bob Sihler - Nov 19, 2006 8:15 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: I did have a feeling European members were going to slam thisI disagree about your assessment of the writer's motives, but I respect your view and your right to hold and express it. And your comment about Myanmar is pretty funny, but some people could see it as demeaning that nation and a sign of cultural snobbery. I don't, but I'm not from Myanmar, either.
Dmitry Pruss - Nov 19, 2006 8:41 pm - Voted 4/10
OK _unintended_ PnP flamebait :)I am sure that the author's motives weren't to inflame the furriners :) It was meant to be a reflective, emotional essay on a topic which is tangentially related to the world of mountains ... just like many other articles on SP.
It's just that *this* particular topic was subtly different ... too easy to connect to politics and worse. So I'd rather have the article, no matter how well intentioned, buried at bottom of the heap, that's all.
Yeah, and as to Myanmar and snobbery LOL... the people of Myanmar have no say in their politics, and so the weird ways of their military rulers do little to stain the people. Weird like when the top general banned coins and notes in denominations of 5s, 10s, and 20s, and printed new money with his personal lucky numbers on them, like 6s, 14s and 17s. Kind of the same line of reasoning as with choosing Imperial over Metric, huh ;) ?
Bob Sihler - Nov 19, 2006 8:43 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: OK _unintended_ PnP flamebait :)Fair enough-- Bob
T Sharp - Nov 19, 2006 5:24 pm - Voted 10/10
Holy Smokes!You get beat up perty good if you write an article with an opinion!
Do not let these negative votes discourage you from contributing to S.P. sm88er, I thought it was humorous writing, that should have been taken as such!
Cheers;
Bob Sihler - Nov 19, 2006 5:51 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Holy Smokes!I saw your post, Tim, and I agree. It seems I had a similar experience recently, didn't I? Since I respect what you have to say, I want to ask if you think I've been too harsh. I've tried to be constructive but honest, and my vote is really about the many mistakes that make this article hard reading for me. As I replied to Corax, we all make mistakes, but this one is just abundant with them.
And although I do see the humor, I don't think it comes out clearly enough.
Marcus Hofmann - Nov 19, 2006 6:57 pm - Voted 6/10
It is not about opinionI think I made it crystal clear in my comment that I did not vote low because of a stated opinion. To the contrary, I have tremendous respect for people that do state their opinion, mainly because I do so myself and know how difficult it can be.
I voted low because the research done on the measurement systems is poor, a comparison non-existent, and the polemic about the definition of the meter is not adequate, because it is a proper scientific definition. swm88er argues practically in favour of his emotional point, claiming that feet are more practical and meters don't make sense. To put it simply, that is just plain wrong. If it was meant to be humorous, I didn't get it, which is just as bad.
However, I'll be more than happy to revise my vote on an updated version of this article, because the topic does have a lot more potential to it.
MoapaPk - Nov 20, 2006 11:44 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: It is not about opinionIf you think the article has errors, you should be specific and supply the corrections. Else we have no way to judge if the "research...is poor".
A lot of your discussion was on temperature units, which are not closely related to the subject of the article (it wasn't called "in defense of Rankine").
I would hardly call any part of the article a polemic. I guess that's a matter of perception; the text seemed somewhat humorous to me.
Marcus Hofmann - Nov 21, 2006 5:53 pm - Voted 6/10
Re: It is not about opinionI was very specific. I am really amazed that many people fail to understand. Am I making myself so terribly unclear? Re-read my first comment. You'll find everything in there: What I don't like about the article. Why I think the research is weak. Why temperature, speed, weight and volume are important for the topic. And what I consider polemic about it.
MoapaPk - Nov 22, 2006 10:02 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: It is not about opinionI guess by "poor... research", I thought you meant that he was making factual errors, such as in the origin of the meter, its definition, etc. The rest of the article seems to be opinion.
(A minor convenience -- a pint of water is a pound.)
As for temperature, the only intrinsic 0 point is absolute zero, -273.18 C. We used to have the convenience that 1 kcalorie was required to raise 1 kilogram of water by 1 degree C, but when we converted to joules, that convenience was lost.
What about time? Why do we continue to use hours and minutes, and multiply by 60 like Sumerians?
The metric system is not as uniform as one might suppose, once you step beyond the very basic units. SI is really neither MKS nor CGS, and there are proponents for each of the last two.
Marcus Hofmann - Nov 23, 2006 9:35 am - Voted 6/10
Re: It is not about opinionYou're making some good points there. This is the kind of work I would have liked to see in the original article. I think that it should have contained a presentation of the different measurement systems and how they work, a presentation of how they interoperate with other systems, and a comparison of their usability, maybe with a focus on mountaineering. The article doesn't do that, which is why I think more research could and should have been done on the topic. And I really would have liked to read that.
I agree that the way we measure time is archaic. But it has the major advantage of being the same all over the world. That doesn't make the system better, but makes for less controversy. ;-)
As far as temperature is concerned (with a focus on mountaineering, which is what, like I said, I always had my focus on) it is extremely useful that at zero degrees, water freezes. It just makes handling the single-most important temperature aspect of mountaineering easy. And it is "symmetric": -30°C feels as cold as 30°C feels hot. I didn't say the metric system was perfect. I just gave examples for why I think it is superior.
And I still don't think the joke about the seemingly circular definition of the meter is funny. I just don't see the humour in making fun of something that is correct. It is superficial at best and written with the intention of being controversial and provocative, and thus polemic. In defense of swm88er it must be said that this is not his, but Gerry Roaches fault, since that part of the article is merely a (partly) reworded repetition of the original. Which is, by the way, in my opinion not a good piece of writing for the same reasons: You just can't be ironic and polemic about a controversial subject without dealing with it properly beforehand.
Corax - Nov 23, 2006 10:54 am - Voted 4/10
Re: It is not about opinionBut it has the major advantage of being the same all over the world.
A side note.
In short time measuring, yes and that's very good. Imagine the chaos if not even time would be constant all over the world :-)
In longer term measuring the world is divided though.
Actually, I have ended up in confusing situations on the time topic now and then.
For example in Afghanistan, when the Talibans were in charge, there was no way to discuss the year of 1997. For "them" it was year 14xx-something. I can't recall. Same thing in Thailand. For the Thais it's year 2549, referring to Buddha's birth. The Chinese are in year 4700-something and so on.
Fortunately, it seems like the world's population has come to the conclusion it's more convenient to use one way to count years (on the official level at least). I think this will happen with length, temperature etc. sooner or later.
On another side note, I have heard the only item which is 100% standardized all over the world is the razor blade. :-)
swm88er - Nov 19, 2006 8:39 pm - Hasn't voted
Please...
Sebastian Hamm - Nov 19, 2006 9:24 pm - Voted 7/10
Unfair? MaybeBob you are right. But I think the article makes fun of the metric system. But I raise my vote to 6/10 because I have the metric system, I think (IMHO) the whole measurements in the US are nonsense, but against to corax I think it should live on because it makes the world more colorful. I like to handle with different measurement or currencies on holiday. It´s funny as long it isn´t in my real world. Now, I made fun of the feet-system. Sorry! I raise it to 7/10! ;-)
Sebastian
Comments
Post a Comment