At 09:22 AM 8/24/97 -0400, Pete Weiss wrote:
>|The next subscrber, has been trying to get off the list for a couple
>|of weeks now. Scanning hasn't produced anything close to his address.
>|He has sent me copies of list mail, so I sure he's trying to get of
>|my list and not some other similar list.
>|
>|His current address is [log in to unmask] and
>|claims to have been subscribed as  [log in to unmask]
>|Scanning does come up with a few @nswc.navy.mil but
>|all with very different sir names.
>
>Try this to help ID
>
>SET listname SHORT822 for *@*.NAVY.MIL
>
>Then wait for your next on-list distribution.  You may then issue a
>
>QUIET SET listname SHORT for *@*.NAVY.MIL
>
>(of course some NAVY.MIL subscribers might not originally have been
>originally set to SHORT).  Next, ask your ex-subscriber wannabee to forward
>that "next" distribution to you with ALL RECEIVED: line headers.

Huh???  SHORT822 is the same as SHORTHDR or SHORT.  Perhaps
you meant IETFHDR.

Anyway, mucking with subscriber settings won't do the trick
(unless done one at a time and examine the effect of each) since
that changes how the list displays (or doesn't) headers up to
the arrival at the list.  What is of interest here is the path
taken *after* it leaves the list, and listserv can't do anything
to change the display of that.

OTOH, it may be possible to ALREADY determine the address (assuming
that some sort of forwarding is occurring) by having the
ex-subscriber wannabee forward any distribution WITH ALL
RECEIVED: line headers.

The other thing I can think of is to send a "sorry, testing"
message individually to the "few" matches on *@*.NAVY.MIL,
after warning the wannabee to not delete his but send it
back to you instead.  The text in each message should vary
slightly so that you can tell which one got there.
Maybe "Sorry, testing.  You are subscribed to LISTNAME as [log in to unmask]
If you got this message and don't know why, just delete it."

Hmmm.  A command to do something like that might be useful.

Cheers,
Stan