Dear listowners, first of all, thank you for the responses to my
NOMAILers question (how to identify them).  The two methods (see
below) to do this gave me the following problems.
 
>         I've also seen the idea of querying the entire list, then processing
>         the huge file you'd receive in order to find the nomails.  This
>         wouldn't distinguish the temp nomails from the forgotten
>         subscriptions (nothing to tell you when the last listserv command was
>         issued), but it would take up a big chunk of your own diskspace.
 
The QUERY *@* results in a list with three lines per subscriber,
making a sort on MAIL=NO a difficult one. Therefor I tried the
following method.
 
>         My method is to do a simple 'get <listname>  (nolock'.  Strip off the
>         list header, then sort the remaining file on column 82 -- blank is
>         currently receiving messages, m is nomail, D is digest.  You can
>         further sort on columns 86-90, which gives you the date of the most
>         recent listserv command concerning that subscriber; it may not be the
>         date they went nomail, but *something* was done by/with that person on
>         that date (my list is set to renew every 6 months, so it's often the
>         confirm message).  It's then your decision how old a 'last command'
>         must be to consider it a dead account.
 
With the 'GET listname (NOL' I receive a message with two lines per
subscriber.  Everything from column 80 on is given on the second
line, therefor giving me similar sort problems.
 
Question: Since I am no good in sorting problems as described above,
          how do I get a list with everything on ONE line, as I had
          expected when using the 'GET name (NOL' command. I can
          handle that kind of sorting.
 
Greetings from Kooi.