>
> That is a perfect description of how metrification is supposed to work and why it hasn't worked in the US. As a country, we detest intrusive and pointless legislation.


As does everyone else. But intrusiveness and pointlessness abound... (sigh)


> The funny thing about standards is that they are only valuable if they aren't changed.

Not entirely correct. Standards loose their meaning if they are changed often, but when a set of standards (note plural) haven't evolved over centuries, they may become out of date, especially if they can all be replaced by a common system.



> Metrification was never completed in any country.


My real reason to answer this. May I be so rude as to ask what planet you occupy? Although I haven't been around to ask all 15 million people, I'm pretty sure noone in any of the Scandinavian countries use anything but metric units. No wait, an exception: Swedes have a special unit for 10 kilometres. I'm a little less sure about the rest of Europe, but I'll grab the bull by the horn and state that the UK is the only non-100%-metric european country.
But then again, maybe I misunderstood your statement...


> When the system was first proposed by French revolutionaries, they wanted a 10-hour day, a 10-day week, a 400-degree circle, and more.


Trivia: I've actually owned a 400-degree compass (the magnetic type used for determining directions). And it wasn't antique.


> It really doesn't make any difference at all whichever system is used. The quantity being measured doesn't change.
>


It does make a difference. Confer your own comment about standardisation of standards.


jul"doesn't remember Fahrenheit. Or Reamur"ian