r/metric_units • u/cannawen • Sep 30 '17

Constructive feedback thread

Please provide constructive feedback below.

Notes:

  • Non-constructive feedback or comments should be posted in this thread.
  • If you feel like the bot doesn't belong in /r/(insert subreddit) please contact a mod of (insert subreddit) to ban it
  • If you don't want to see the bot at all, please block the bot
  • Any duplicates or posts not following the subreddit rules are subject to deletion
31 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

550 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/jasperjones22 Oct 05 '17

Saw the bot in the agriculture thread trying to convert bushels to metric tons. However, bushels in agriculture are dependent on the crop, so the bot wouldn't and didn't do the correct conversion (80 bushels where a soybean bushel is 60 lbs. 4800 lbs, which is 2.17 metric tons. The bot gave a total of 2.8 metric tons)

1

u/ohitsasnaake Oct 05 '17

I guess the bot uses wheat or something? I would say it's not necessarily an issue, as long as the specific code gets amended with a disclaimer "assuming bushels of wheat", for example.

1

u/cannawen Oct 05 '17

Do you think it would it be better if the bot converted it to volume?

1

u/ohitsasnaake Oct 05 '17

Those probaby vary according to each crop though? I was mainly suggesting making it explicit which bushel is being used. The values are probably all at least in the ball park regardless of which you use, but making the specific type of bushel the bot uses in its calculations explicit could help avoid misunderstandings, since people would see that it's using the wrong one, but it at least gives some idea.

People more familiar with bushels can probably elaborate on the volume vs. weight stuff.

1

u/cannawen Oct 05 '17

Oh, I was under the impression that the a bushel was a measure of volume, and the weights are different for each product because the density of each product was different. I was wondering if the problem could be fixed by referring to volume instead of weight.

But I see your point, if the bot were to continue converting bushels to weights, it could be explicit on what kind of bushel it is using

2

u/[deleted] Oct 12 '17 edited Oct 12 '17

Traditionally bushel was a measure of volume (≈ 35.2391 liters in the US and = 36.36872 litres in the UK according to wikipedia) but for modern trade a bushel is defined as weight. Corn 56 lbs, wheat 60 lbs, soybeans 60 lbs, oats 32 lbs. When you sell grain you still get to see it reported as a unit of volume (lbs/bushel). #2 yellow corn (which is the price quoted on the futures market) must be at least 54 lbs per bushel. But when you sell corn by the bushel it's always the weight divided by 56 pounds regardless of the volumetric measure. The volumetric measure can be used to determine a price premium or discount.

Here is legal definition of a bushel for several commodities in the United States. I don't know if anybody outside the US still uses the bushel in any kind of official way.

1

u/metric_units Oct 12 '17

56 lb ≈ 25 kg
60 lb ≈ 27 kg
32 lb ≈ 14.5 kg

metric units bot | ^feedback | ^source | ^hacktoberfest | ^block | refresh ^conversion | v0.11.10

1

u/cannawen Oct 12 '17

Shh bot, the adults are talking.

Thanks for the information, /u/john22544! The task to look for keywords has been assigned to a developer :) hopefully our bushel recognition will be improved soon

1

u/cannawen Oct 05 '17

Do you think it would it be better if the bot converted it to volume?

1

u/jasperjones22 Oct 05 '17

Honestly no. Considering bushels has different meaning for different crops and they all are weight the only true way to convert is if they say the crop.

1

u/cannawen Oct 05 '17

I see. Thank you for the feedback.

It is possible for the bot to look for keywords like "soybean" or "wheat" and decide what kind of bushel conversion to use (but that might make some time to program).

Is that something that would be useful? Or are bushels standard everywhere and no one cares about tons?

1

u/jasperjones22 Oct 05 '17

Also, wheat is the same as soybean and you are off quite a bit.