Sometimes having too many onuses might make one ornery. Bill Fairchild ----- Original Message -----
From: "John Gilmore" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 10:17:03 AM Subject: Re: Is the oner of IBM-Main still with us? Here the onus probandi clearly falls on those who assert that the owner of IBM-MAIN is defunct. The only evidence for this notion yet adduced is that he has not replied to an email message, and I do not find it persuasive: There are days when I omit to reply to many such. In passing, the [Latin] plural of 'onus' is 'onera', from which the [English] adjective 'onerous' is derived in the usual way. [Latin dropouts are of course free to use 'onuses' instead if they judge it felicitous.] The form 'oner' has no standing. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
