One suggestion I heard is double aught. Which reminded me I aught to be doin
fomething other than meffing with trivial e-mail, only morefo than before.
George Kramer wrote:
> At 12:38 PM 10/11/98 EDT, John wrote:
> >By the way, I just scheduled a workshop in naught 1. (I ought to know the
> >correct spelling, but I probably don't)
> Ought this not be "aught," as in aught 1 (aught according to Webster's 10th
> means nothing or "zero"...."naught" mean nothing or not.)....
> Ah, I just love it when preservation turns to semantics....:)
> George Kramer, M.S.
> Historic Preservation Consultant
> Ashland, Oregon
SOS Gab & Eti -- http://www.geocities.com/~orgrease