|
Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:53:25 -0400 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-transfer-encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Comments: |
|
On Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:29 PM, James Morrill wrote:
> But when you send a message to a super-list it isn't being sent to the
> sub-lists, just the *subscribers* on those sub-lists.
Right, the super-list creates a merged group of subscribers from the 2
sub-lists.
> I already got shot down once for suggesting this (but it works for us
:-)
> - instead of using the super-list setup, *subscribe* the "sub-lists"
to
> the "super-list". Then messages to the "super-list" are sent to the
> "sub-lists" (not just the subscribers of the sub-lists) and the
options
> the subscribers have set on each (sub-)list are honored.
I thought of this as a work around too. I can set the Send= option to
include the
2 sub-lists so any subscriber can send to the combined list. And e-mail
sent to
the Super-list would be set to the 2 sub lists directly.
The downside is that for subscribers on both lists they would get a
digest from each list.
I guess I don't understand why LISTSERV would default to not honoring
the sub-list
subscriber options. In my opinion it makes the Super/Sub list setup
less useful.
Mike
############################
To unsubscribe from the LSTSRV-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=LSTSRV-L&A=1
|
|
|