On 14 Aug 97 14:28:44 -0400, [log in to unmask] wrote:

>
>On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:30:10 -0500, Bill Harrison <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:
>
>>Is there any command where you can see how many subscribers are set to
>>mail AND digest without getting a full list of their names and
>>options. What I want is the number that messages are being distributed
>>to like the ACK message shows.
>>
>>Something similar to
>>
>>        rev listname by mail AND digest short
>>
>Since it is not possible for a single address receive both MAIL and DIGEST
>form of msgs you can't.   I assume you mean
>
>QUERY listname WITH MAIL FOR *@*
>QUERY listname WITH DIGEST FOR *@*

This is what I meant. I wanted to see the total for these two figures
without having to do two commands and then add them together. Also I
wanted to get just the figure with out all the names and options.

>
>And you hope this sum of the 2 numbers will add up to what ACK shows.  It
>won't.

Ben, I do not mean to question or argue with you but on our list,
these two figures added together do show the same number as an ack. I
tested it yesterday and my ACK showed 657 messages distributed. I then
did the above two commands and the mail subscribers equaled 500 and
the digest subscribers equaled 157, for a total of 657.

>Lots of people try to figure out what that number means.  It is NOT
>a total subscriber number.

I realize that mail + digest does not equal Total Subscribers IF you
have any nomail subscribers. But won't mail + digest + nomail = total
subscribers (I do not know how the concealed subscribers affects this.
I have not tested this).


  [rev listname (noheader short will do that]

This is definitely the total subscription. And I suppose this is the
only way to get what I want. I will just have to do a little addition
and subtraction.    :(   With all this technology, I thought I could
get listserv to do that for me.

>
>Because LISTSERV uses a special distribution algorithm (LISTSERV rarely
>sends out 1msg for 1 recipent,

I also realize this but I believe the ack number is counting the
actual number of final messages that will be distributed. I am going
to test this right now on our list. I will also see how the concealed
people figure into this.

I will let you know how it comes out.


--
Bill Harrison
[log in to unmask]