blake murphy wrote:
>
>
> what i find myself doing - and for the life of me can't figure out why - is
> when the time is announced - say on the t.v. screen or some p.a. system - i
> look at my watch or another clock in the room.
>
> it's not just me, though. if someone says at a meeting 'well it's almost
> one o'clock, it's almost guaranteed a couple people will look at their
> watches. it's baffling.


CBC has a time signal at 1 pm. They announce it as it is coming up.
There is a serious of beeps that stop at 10 seconds before 1:00 then a
long one. If I happen to be listening to it I always check my watch and
set it if it is not dead on. Since I manage to catch it at least once
every two weeks my watch is always within a few seconds of the correct
time. When I have an appointment for a specific time I figure out how
long it should take me to get there, allow time for delays and leave the
house in time to arrive a little early, and if I run into a slight delay
I should make it on time. I really don't understand the concept of
setting a clock ahead a few minutes, because it seems that people who do
that will end up running late anyway.

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:42:41 -0500, Dave Smith wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>
>> what i find myself doing - and for the life of me can't figure out why - is
>> when the time is announced - say on the t.v. screen or some p.a. system - i
>> look at my watch or another clock in the room.
>>
>> it's not just me, though. if someone says at a meeting 'well it's almost
>> one o'clock, it's almost guaranteed a couple people will look at their
>> watches. it's baffling.
>
>
> CBC has a time signal at 1 pm. They announce it as it is coming up.
> There is a serious of beeps that stop at 10 seconds before 1:00 then a
> long one. If I happen to be listening to it I always check my watch and
> set it if it is not dead on. Since I manage to catch it at least once
> every two weeks my watch is always within a few seconds of the correct
> time. When I have an appointment for a specific time I figure out how
> long it should take me to get there, allow time for delays and leave the
> house in time to arrive a little early, and if I run into a slight delay
> I should make it on time. I really don't understand the concept of
> setting a clock ahead a few minutes, because it seems that people who do
> that will end up running late anyway.

i find setting watches fast a little baffling, too. you'd think the
wearer would just say, 'well, it's *really* five until one,' and continue
to dawdle. some people say it helps them, though.

i do seem to find that judging 'how much time i have before 'x' o'clock'
easier when looking at a clock with a dial rather than digital, though.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:


>> that will end up running late anyway.
>
> i find setting watches fast a little baffling, too. you'd think the
> wearer would just say, 'well, it's *really* five until one,' and continue
> to dawdle. some people say it helps them, though.

Yeah, I bet it helps them? I have too much experience with some of those
who do it, and they were all aware that they were not really late
because their clocks were set ahead, and everyone of them was the type
who habitually run late because they can't get their act together.

> i do seem to find that judging 'how much time i have before 'x' o'clock'
> easier when looking at a clock with a dial rather than digital, though.

That is a matter of simple math. It seems to work better for people
lacking those skills if the appointment is on the hour. My wife has
trouble with it and I often tease where with quizzes like how many hours
and minutes between odd hours like quarter to eleven until 2:20. I
admit that it is not always automatic to me and that sometimes it takes
me a few seconds to do the math, but at least I can do it. :-)

On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 11:34:01 -0500, Dave Smith wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>
>>> that will end up running late anyway.
>>
>> i find setting watches fast a little baffling, too. you'd think the
>> wearer would just say, 'well, it's *really* five until one,' and continue
>> to dawdle. some people say it helps them, though.
>
> Yeah, I bet it helps them? I have too much experience with some of those
> who do it, and they were all aware that they were not really late
> because their clocks were set ahead, and everyone of them was the type
> who habitually run late because they can't get their act together.
>
>> i do seem to find that judging 'how much time i have before 'x' o'clock'
>> easier when looking at a clock with a dial rather than digital, though.
>
> That is a matter of simple math. It seems to work better for people
> lacking those skills if the appointment is on the hour. My wife has
> trouble with it and I often tease where with quizzes like how many hours
> and minutes between odd hours like quarter to eleven until 2:20. I
> admit that it is not always automatic to me and that sometimes it takes
> me a few seconds to do the math, but at least I can do it. :-)

i will confess math is not my strong point, but i think it might be more
that i grew up in an analog clock world, not digital, and sorta learned to
'judge' time then. but it doesn't make much sense, i admit.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 11:34:01 -0500, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > blake murphy wrote:

> >> i do seem to find that judging 'how much time i have before 'x' o'clock'
> >> easier when looking at a clock with a dial rather than digital, though.
> >
> > That is a matter of simple math. It seems to work better for people
> > lacking those skills if the appointment is on the hour.

> i will confess math is not my strong point, but i think it might be more
> that i grew up in an analog clock world, not digital, and sorta learned to
> 'judge' time then. but it doesn't make much sense, i admit.

Makes a lot of sense to me. There's not just one "right" way of doing
things. My wife has been pretty involved in elementary school math
curriculum for the past fifteen years, both in choosing, approving and
volunteering in the classroom, both to help and to see how it is
working. Fifteen years ago they adopted a curriculum using
"manipulatives". That means little doodads that the kids can actually
touch. For instance, when learning fractions, there will be plastic
circles and parts of circles. When you put four quarter circles on top
of a circle, it gets real clear what a "quarter" or "1/4" is. When you
put two quarters on top of a half, it's equally clear why two quarters
are the same as one half.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Nov 3, 7:38*pm, Omelet > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *Goomba > wrote:
> > DK wrote:
>
> > >> Tracfone.
>
> > > I'm not familiar with them. *I would think they would offer the same
> > > service.
>
> > > -dk
>
> > It is a disposable phone often purchased by folks who can't pass credit
> > checks or don't want to leave a paper trail.
>
> <lol> No dear. *I just don't want to pay for a cellphone contract!
>
> My credit rating is probably better than yours is. *My last report
> showed 760.
>
> Why should I pay $60.00 per month for a cellphone when I can keep it to
> under $20.00?
> --
> Peace! Om
>
> "Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot survive." -- Dalai Lama

The exact reason I have a prepaid- I hardly ever use it, and I'm too
cheap to pay for something I hardly use.

blake murphy wrote:

> i will confess math is not my strong point, but i think it might be more
> that i grew up in an analog clock world, not digital, and sorta learned to
> 'judge' time then. but it doesn't make much sense, i admit.
>


Tell us, blake, does your clock ever *laugh* at you...???


--
Best
Greg

" I find Greg Morrow lowbrow, witless, and obnoxious. For him to claim that
we are some
kind of comedy team turns my stomach."
- "cybercat" to me on rec.food.cooking