Francoise Becker wrote:

> The only thing I can think of that's close would be to have the LISTSERV
> maintainer SERVE the user OFF. The real solution if you want to deny
> access to list postings is to delete their subscription (assuming
> Subscription=By Owner and Notebook=...,Private).

We probably will have to delete the subscriber -- but that seems harsh
in light of their actions. We were told that the subscriber planned to
violate the privacy of the list, but it hadn't happened yet. We don't
want the subscriber to have access to the list until we can determine
exactly what is going on, but we don't want to remove them in case the
situation is being read wrong -- it seems harsh as they haven't actually
done anything yet.

> Umm. I'm not sure what it is you want to _retain_ for the user. If I
> understand correctly, you want it so that they can't receive list mail,
> can't post to the list, can't read the archives... what's left that you
> want to preserve that unsubscribing would take away?

Some semblance of dignity?

It would seem that, if someone is set to nopost -- presumably because
they are causing problems or, in this case, might cause a serious
problem, then there should also be a way to restrict them from getting
at the archives and subscriber base to prevent further problems. I have
no problem with removing someone who *has* caused problems, but this is
a more iffy area.

> Francoise

--
Karen Reznek
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]