On Wed, 15 Sep 1993 11:10:49 EDT "Sathaye, Shashi" <[log in to unmask]> said: >We are 'the backbone' listserv and we are not 'backdated'. Most of these jobs come from a server in Brazil that I am unable to update because it is chronically screwed up, I guess they have a bad disk unit or a MW link or whatever. The more you fix it, the more it breaks again a few months later. >On a differnt topic : if we cannot afford to pay for the current version >would we still be 'backbone' server? It is an open question. Initially, yes. In the longer term, I doubt it will be possible to maintain 100% compatibility with the new VMS and unix versions, and L-Soft is unlikely to slow down development or write special migration/gateway code just so that non-paying customers can remain on the backbone. I wouldn't have done it one year ago when LISTSERV was still free - I'd have called it a waste of my time, and a bad idea anyway since I can't write fixes for back-level sites. Now that it's a waste of "development resources" and an "incentive for people not to become paying customers", it's even less likely to happen :-) While I can't make any guarantee, I'd say you would remain on the backbone for 6-12 months, but once the VMS and unix versions hit the street (4Q94-1Q95) this will probably not be possible. Eric