- --- Multiple editors without sharing. - Torino, 1995-08-14
 
I write to LSTOWN-L, since my contribution is more questions than
answers: I'd need myself a solution, since I work from non-equivalent
addresses, sometimes being necessary to circumvent local misfunction of
one or the other.
 
   Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 15:21:33 -0400
   From: PNEWS <[log in to unmask]>
   Subject: Re: KILLING SPAMS
 
"I want to be able to edit my lists from two separate sites. Do I just put
a comma between addresses after "editor", i.e. "Editor= [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask]"?" [HR]
 
I think so. But be aware of the practical consequences. Only the first
of the addresses receives a copy of the mail to approve, so you have
sistematically to forward everything to your other address. HOLD doesn't
simplify things, because the OK mechanism (primarily a security device)
accepts answers only from the address to which the OK request was sent
by LISTSERV.
 
The new MODERATOR mechanism doesn't help in your (or my) case, since it
fairly shares messages between the two addresses (and to each of them
the rules above apply).
 
A solution could be (but I ask for confirmation by LSTOWN-L wisdom)
having EDITOR=(editor-list), EDITOR-LIST being a real list (private)
with your two addresses as subscribers. The two addresses should receive
identical copies (will they be in the format apt for approval ?), and
it will be up to you not releasing two times the same message; perhaps
the HOLD mechanism will work, giving the "two of you" different approval
codes (and if they were for the same held copy, there will be no risk of
double approval).
 
<-- Eugenio Gatto    (CIDEM, Politecnico di Torino, Italia)
                     (list owner [log in to unmask])
    TEL 39.11.564'6600 FACS 39.11.564'6609 EM [log in to unmask]