At 08:19 PM 7/25/97 -0400, Ed Price wrote:
>OK so I am dumb :-), but how do you do it if you encourage people to use

No, not dumb.  We all have different skills sets.  We each know things that
others don't, and sharing them is how we all learn.  My apologies if it
sounded like an insult, as not my intent.  (Yes, saw the smiley, but know
that I often sound a bit rough to people with my plain talk, usually less
polished than it should be)

>NOMAIL for temporary absences rather than sub and unsub without forcing the
>RENEW function on then.  My goal is a periodic message telling NOMAIL

Again, if they know how to sub and unsub regularly, you're way ahead of
most listowners.  I have folks on all my lists (including the techie ones)
that can't figure out how to shift from Park into Drive, I'm sure).   For
newbies I understand this....but for gurus in certain computer areas, this
inability or unwillingness to comprehend something this simply disgusting
to this geezer.

>subscribers to ignore the message if they continue interested, to usub if
>not and finally cleanse the list via the 'bounces.'

I like to keep my lists reasonably clean.  I use six month renewals.  Yes,
some have trouble with those too, but such is life.  After starting
renewals (after four years of no cleansing), each of my lists dropped about
a third in membership....there were that many nomail who were long gone (on
first round, about half the renewals bounced).

I guess I don't understand what's wrong with renewals if you have
apparently competent people who can do the basics.  Keeping a list clean is
fine.  Saves CPU time, but rarely much money, even if you're paying for
cycles.  And, the cycles difference between sub/unsub and mail/nomail is
trivial, right Eric?  Either way takes two commands, one leaving and one
returning.  I just don't get the difference.

>My approach makes sense to me but perhaps effective support is beyond the
>capacity of an obsolete Engineer - Class of '44 who is looking for an
>easier way but without forcing RENEW.

I've no objection to your approach....it would work easily if you had
someone to do what you want....or if Eric had designed LISTSERV(R)
differently.  But since it appears to me to be the same to users either
way, and there's an easy and quick method to handle renewals, I guess I
still don't understand what needs fixing.  Yes, I'll grant that with 12-14
lists at any one time over 8 years, I'm "used to it" and don't see the
problem, maybe due to my own tunnel vision.

>To your good health

And to yours

cheers

dan
(geek librarian for 30 years)

Dan Lester
[log in to unmask]
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.  Erasmus, 1534