> When a post is posted by a sub-list subscriber, all (both
> > super and sub) get the post, ...EXCEPT the sub-list poster.
Which we want to happen.  I have gone round and round with this, since i
have others setup similar, and they seem to work how we want them to work.
Somewhere a keyword is nulling out the other is my guess.  ...read all the
docs over and over......that goes nowhere.  I do not want to make any
changes to the sub-list since that is built and I shouldn't have to I just
wnat to grab the subscribers.  And besides it works prior.
I am still expermenting.  The logs show clearly what is happening.
thanks.

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Rauch wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Michele Francis wrote:
> > Yes, i have a super-list with 10 subscribers and a sub-list
> > with 40+ subscribers.  When a post is posted by the
> > super-list subscriber, all (both super and sub) get the post
> > and the poster gets a copy of the message.  So repro is
> > working.
>
> OK.
>
> > When a post is posted by a sub-list subscriber, all (both
> > super and sub) get the post, ...
>
> Do you mean, "When a post is posted TO THE SUPERLIST by a
> sub-list subscriber, all (both super and sub) get the post,
> ..."?
>
> If so, that means this person is either ALSO a subscriber to the
> superlist, or that the superlist has "send= public" (otherwise,
> how could his postings get posted to that superlist?).
>
> If not, then there's more to your lists' configuration than
> you're telling/aware of?? E.g., these "sub-list subscribers" are
> owners/editors of the superlist.
>
>
> > but the poster never gets a copy of the message, which we
> > want to happen.  So repro doesn't work for the sub-list....
>
> No. Assuming your description is strictly correct (which frankly
> I don't understand why), then if the person is ONLY a sub-list
> subscriber AND somehow gets to post to the SUPERlist (as you
> stated), then he wouldn't expect to receive a REPRO from that
> SUPERlist since he's not subscribed to it. REPRO applies to list
> subscribers, not to "public" posters. One might think that he
> still should have received the posting from the sublist (simply
> as one of the SUBlist subscribers --not because he authored the
> SUPERlist posting). So, it would seem that LISTSERV is pruning
> the list of recipients in an odd way (Remember Pete Weiss'
> observation regarding LISTSERV's behavior). (Or, your
> description above is wrong about who is posting where and not
> receiving whatever?)
>
> Peter R
>
> > So, how is the superlist know not to send a copy of the
> > message to the sub-list poster?????  How? I don't know.
> >
> > thanks for all the help.....I appreciate it.
>