Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SI Grammar and Spelling Lab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (911)	2/21/1998 3:27:00 AM
From: Sowbug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4710

messages 1-800 (or messages #1-800) why bother with 'nos.' when the numbers speak for themselves? Good question, and I have an admittedly only semi-satisfactory answer. In legal briefs we adhere to a pretty formal writing style, and a lawyer wouldn't be caught dead using an ampersand, pound sign, or percentage symbol. You write them out. Additionally, we usually refer to particular items of "discovery," such as "Interrogatory No. 1," and for reasons I don't know that's just how everyone does it, and "Interrogatory 1" wouldn't match "Interrogatory No. 1" in the set of interrogatories we're disputing, giving rise to a question whether the two are the same (though that would allow us to bill an extra half-hour or two). A better answer is that I'm curious what the thread has to say about it.