Ben Parker was reported to have said:

 >At L-Soft, we use LISTSERV lists in many unusual or untypical ways.  It's a
 >bit different but think of it as kind of a 'reverse' list (many -> few)
 >instead of a more normal list usage (few -> many or many ->
many).  List Owner
 >addresses for our Hosting customers of course go to those customer List
Owners
 >who do respond in the usual, personal way as each sees fit.  But L-Soft lists
 >generally get no such personal response from the List Owner.  You are
supposed
 >to write to the correct Address as publicly stated so your message gets
to the
 >(small) group of (list subscribers) who are really the people you want to
 >reach with your query.

As a long-time (aka "old") list-owner and a person who has helped many
university departments setup mail accounts, advertize contact addresses,
change ownership addresses, I agree:

It is most helpful to use "role" accounts and other impersonal aliases
for official organizational functions.  This helps eliminate many and
diverse updates to published contact info, which (published info)  has
the 1/2 life of the infamous Craig Shergold Make-a-wish Foundation
request.  Folks come and go, take vacation, sick leave.   Having a list
(and an archive) helps with so many of those issues.

Though I'm not sure that it has been used in a meaningful way when a peer
list of owners and subscribers are involved, I had once thought that a
list definition (let's call it "B") that had some keywords such as:

OWNER= primary_owner,(B)
REPLY-TO= LIST,RESPECT
NOTEBOOK= ...PRIVATE...

would be extremely useful if a subscriber was unavailable, anyone on the
list could turn off (or on) the other's options.


/P