At 7:44 PM -0600 05/27/01, Ben Parker wrote:
>No need [for  invisible test].  The user is notifed when they have
>been served back on.

At 12:21 AM -0400 05/28/01, Roger Fajman wrote:
>Served out and served off mean the same thing.  LISTSERV accepts both
>...................
>Any command to LISTSERV will do.  If you get a response, you are not
>served out.
>NOPOST is not forced by SERVE OUT.

At 12:43 AM -0500 05/28/01, Mary Siegel wrote:
>I know some have been saying that the computer sends them a message
>when they are served again..... Maybe they work, maybe they don't.
>However, one failsafe way would be for you to put them on Review and
>have them send a message.  Then you can stop the message, let them
>know it came through, and lift the restriction.

_______
Thanks you all on all counts.

Yes, Listserve sends both me and the subscriber, notice that he has
been served  again, but I like the added hands-on of verification --
if only to know that he read/understood the notice!

Review is an ELEGANT solution!  At least for Classic.  In LITE, I can
ask the subscriber verify by sending command and telling me if he
does NOT get response.

Finally, I am very comforted  to know that Listserv-speak allows for
prepositional ambiguity :>)







  ___________________
        Jane-Kerin Moffat
<[log in to unmask]>