On Thu, 5 Aug 1993 20:17:55 -0400 Chris Lewis <[log in to unmask]> said: >That incident was indeed a finger problem on my part, but it still begs >the question of whether a LISTSERV should ever bounce a duplicate back >at a USENET-origin posting. (...) But don't do this until Eric fixes the >bounce-usenet postings problem. Are we speaking the same language? I thought we had already made the point that LISTSERV can't know that the message came from usenet. Therefore there is not going to be a "fix" to this "problem". This being said, I never cease to be amazed at the intolerance of usenet people for non-usenet behaviour (often referred to as "fascist"). When a mailing list manager decides to gateway his list to usenet, he and all the subscribers know they will have to put up with a number of things which are normal in the usenet world and orthogonal to the mailing list philosophy, such as total lack of control (yes, I know you can moderate, but in practice people have no time for that). They put up, in the interest of communication. Usenet people, on the other hand, seem very thin-skinned and it doesn't take much for them to start complaining that there are systems in the world which dare to be different. I have no obligation to modify LISTSERV to save you from the major trouble of having to invest 20 seconds a month deleting one useless mail message. I have already pointed out that I have no reliable way to know that the message comes from usenet, so I cannot fix the problem. And yet in all your messages you seem to assume that, of course, I *will* modify the behaviour of LISTSERV in the general case just to avoid offending usenet people - it's just a matter of pressure, maybe it will take another 20 messages, maybe another 50, who knows. This ridiculous discussion has been going on for too long and people are starting to sign off. This will be my last message on the topic. I will not "fix" your problem because I cannot identify usenet postings in a reliable way. If in the future it becomes possible to identify them I will reconsider. Until this becomes possible you are just wasting the time of the 500-1000 people reading this list. End of discussion. Eric