On Mon, 20 Feb 1995, John Buckman wrote:
 
> * There would be no way to control whether the user of "InfoMagnet LM" (list
> manager) actually is a list manager (though I could control who gets the
> software).  If they were a list manager, it would be hard to control that
> person from mucking with other lists.
 
In my own view, this would create more problems than it would be worth.
The security aspects of this proposal bother me.  I'd like to know that
there's virtually no potential for abuse.  In addition, this proposed LM
version would not actually give list-owners the power to do several
essential functions that are specific to list-owners.  I would not find it
very convenient to have to switch back and forth between using this LM
version for some functions and using "normal" methods for other functions.
 
If an all-functions-in-one package were feasible, then the following
automated capabilities (in addition to ADD, DEL and SET listname FOR )
would be helpful:
 
-- PUTting files in general
 
-- Editing and PUTting the list header specifically.  A GUI might be
developed to enable changing most header keywords by toggling, or
cutting/pasting addresses for Owner=, Editor=, Filter=, Notify=.
 
-- Managing error notices.  Some part of the program might gather up
notices and report daily to the list-owner, and offer a menu for actions.
A sub-routine might collect alleged "user unknown" addresses and after X
days (X set by the list-owner) offer actions.  The list-owner would be
alerted immediately if a first time error notice had been delayed for 7
days or longer.
 
A special software that could ease those latter two in particular would be
*very* handy.
 
Now of course, there is the issue of whether writing a lot of new code
would be worth the relatively small market for list-owners software.  You
might size this up by making an estimate of the sales price of such
software and then surveying us here by asking "if a product could do A, B,
C functions and cost X dollars, would you buy it? -- and be sure to answer
this survey and accurately so because if an insufficient number of people
would purchase it, we won't be developing it".
 
-- Roger Burns   [log in to unmask]