<I did specify REMOTE lists >
 
ok - apparently I ( and Nick and ? ) have a semantics and/or
     forest-and-trees type problem on this subject.
 
my problem - I have a VERY active local user who was badly hurt and
will be unable to access the net for weeks/months.
 
for local lists, I said ( as postmast ( I thought ) ):
 
set * nomail for Z47W32A4@*
 
and all 20-odd local lists ( person works from multiple node-names )
were updated.
 
I then started on remote lists -
I tried: ( note - in most cases, I did do a query first, but was trying
           to avoid typing long and/or gatewayed nodenames so I simply
           'retrieved' and modified my QUERY command )
 
tell listserv at ubvm set fact-l nomail for Z47W32A4@*
Ready; T=0.03/0.04 14:57:46
DMTRGX171I From UBVM(LISTSERV): * You are not the owner of the FACT-L list.
DMTRGX171I From UBVM(LISTSERV): *
DMTRGX171I From UBVM(LISTSERV): * No entry updated.
tell listserv at ubvm for Z47W32A4@albnyvms set fact-l nomail
Ready; T=0.03/0.04 14:58:46
RDR FILE 7560 SENT FROM MAILER   PUN WAS 3374 RECS 0019 CPY  001 M NOHOLD NOKEEP
* New mail from "L-Soft list server at UBVM (1.8a)"
* <[log in to unmask]>
tell listserv at rpitsvm for Z47W32A4@albnyvms set intercom nomail
Ready; T=0.03/0.04 15:07:00
DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * Your delivery options have been
successfully set
DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * to "NOMAIL". You are being mailed a short
report
DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * with  the exact  settings  now in  use for
your
DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * subscription. Please take a few moments to
check
DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * that this is indeed what you wanted.
 
 
if my original format was what a listowner would say, what is the correct
way a postmast should proceed in this situation.  Are only listowners
allowed to use wildcards in a SET command while remote postmasts as well
as listowners are allowed to use them in query commands ?
 
-mike