Darrick:
On mulling over your somewhat intemperate response, I realize that you have
completely misunderstood what I was trying to achieve.
Let me rephrase what I was saying in the message you appear to find
offensive.
1. Both Nick and you sent email messages to C&H's customer relations email
address, complimenting them on their use of metric packaging. You, yourself,
went so far as to emphasize that your compliment related to metrication and
not to the product itself.
2. Both you and Nick received identical canned replies (as Nick, himself,
subsequently pointed out), basically containing a marketing message about
their product and no mention of their metric packaging. It appears, in fact,
to be a computer-selected response, chosen on the basis of key words (such
as package or packaging) or phrases in your and Nick's messages.
3. It seemed to me that further compliments would, more than likely, be
answered with the same canned message.
4. I concluded that it would be futile to pursue that approach, WITH C&H
SUGAR, any further -- and said so.
Nowhere did I suggest that one not compliment manufacturers and others on
their moves towards metrication. My remarks applied solely to that avenue
with that particular manufacturer. As I was addressing the situation as it
existed, AFTER they had replied to you, my comments were in no way critical
of your message to them. In fact, I took pains to acknowledge that you had
clearly emphasized the metric aspect.
If you are in any doubt as to my own dedication to the cause of metrication,
I suggest you visit the SI Navigator web site (http://metric1.org), into
which I have put many hundreds of hours of effort, not to mention the cost
of paying for the registration of three domain names (metric1.org,
metric1.net and metric1.com) and two years of web hosting fees (to Verio).
If you are still not convinced, I suggest you ask other subscribers to this
list server (including -- as long as you're name dropping -- USMA board
members).
As for my being nothing more than a bitter person, that is one of the most
ridiculous things I've ever heard. I believe you owe me an apology on that
one. I'll take care not to hold my breath waiting for it, though.
Bill Potts, FBCS, CMS (and USMA member)
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Darrick Priest
> Sent: April 20, 2001 22:59
> To: U.S. Metric Association
> Subject: [USMA:12347] RE: A E-Mail to C&H
>
>
> Bill
>
> It is clear to me that you are nothing more than a bitter person who has
> nothing more than to see something negative out of something positive--not
> matter how small that positive effort may be.
>
> Since you can only indulge yourself in ad hominems, I suggestion you focus
> your energies on an other group.
>
> I've already received several laurels from the USMA board members with
> regards to my efforts of sending positive messages to companies
> that endorse
> the metric system. If you were a student of history you would know that
> simply because you've gained a victory doesn't necessarily mean
> that you've
> won the war: you need to continue to fight, protect, and secure
> what you've
> gained. I find nothing pointless with what I'm doing and will continue to
> do it. What I do find pointless is attacking the efforts of
> others based on
> what you think we should do.
>
> We all have something to contribute with what little time and resources we
> have; you are not the authority here. So far, I've seen other people
> following my example and I will continue--now more than ever--to call
> companies that support the metric and report their replies to the USMA
> listserv. Any negative rebuttal from you will be, from this point on,
> ignored and considered--pointless.
>
> Darrick Priest
> USMA Member
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bill Potts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 7:31 PM
> Subject: [USMA:12345] RE: A E-Mail to C&H
>
>
> > Darrick:
> >
> > Despite their adoption of a hard metric size, it now seems to
> be pointless
> > to write to congratulate them about it.
> >
> > Even though you were quite emphatic about the reason for your message,
> they
> > sent you a standard, canned reply that related not one little bit to the
> > thrust of your message.
> >
> > I suggest we simply count their packaging action as a win for
> metrication
> > and move on.
> >
> > Bill Potts, CMS
> > Roseville, CA
> > http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > > Behalf Of Darrick Priest
> > > Sent: April 20, 2001 19:19
> > > To: U.S. Metric Association
> > > Subject: [USMA:12342] A E-Mail to C&H
> > >
> > >
> > > Several days ago, after receiving Nikolay Malyarov's enlightening
> > > e-mail, I
> > > took the time to follow Nikolay's example and write to C and H
> > > regarding the
> > > 2 kg Baker's Sugar. I want to give credit where credit is due
> (including
> > > thanks) by acknowledging Nikolay's efforts of writing to
> companies with
> a
> > > positive message of metrication.
> > >
> > > C and H just replied to my digital missive; so, I'll share it
> > > with you all:
> > >
> > > Dear Mr. Priest:
> > > Thank you for taking the time to contact C&H Sugar Company
> > > regarding our new
> > > C&H Pure Cane Baker's Sugar.
> > >
> > > We have been looking forward to the introduction of this new
> product for
> > > quite some time; you can imagine how delighted we are to hear
> > > from consumers
> > > who are pleased. We were confident our consumers would be
> > > enthusiastic about
> > > Baker's Sugar, but it is very rewarding to have our hopes confirmed.
> > >
> > >
> > > Baker's Sugar is perfect for all baked goods, such as cakes, cookies,
> > > pastries and brownies. It is especially good for icings, frostings,
> > > meringues, candies and other confections. Its finer texture
> allows baked
> > > foods to bake more evenly without soft spots or lumps. It blends
> > > quicker and
> > > smoother, melts faster with no gritty texture and will be perfect for
> jams
> > > or jellies. It is preferred by many professional bakers, and by
> homemakers
> > > who are passionate about baking. It can be substituted
> > > cup-for-cup whenever
> > > your recipe calls for granulated sugar.
> > >
> > >
> > > I do want to mention that due to the fine crystal size, it is
> > > very important
> > > that Baker's Sugar be kept dry. Hardening or lumps may occur if the
> sugar
> > > gets moist, and there is no adequate way to soften Baker's Sugar
> > > if it does
> > > become hard.
> > >
> > > Best regard,
> > >
> > > Connie C. Hunter, C&H Sugar
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is my letter that I wrote to them:
> > >
> > > One of the many metric supporters (Nikolay Malyarov) sent out the
> > > word that
> > > you are selling your product Baker's Sugar in 2 kg. This is fantastic!
> We
> > > members of the USMA thank you so much for taking the courage to
> > > support the
> > > metric system. Now that I know that you are a supporter, I will
> > > buy my next
> > > bag of baker's sugar from your company. Thank you so much...you don't
> know
> > > how many people you've pleased.
> > >
> > > Darrick Priest
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I urge each of you to follow Nikolay's example and write to C
> and H as I
> > > have.
> > >
> > > Keep it positive everyone.
> > >
> > > Darrick Priest
> > >
> > > USMA Member
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
