I think where I'm going with this is that "Listowner" is a pretty clear
term that, unfortuately, may not apply to who has the final authority
over the list.  If the Jones clan starts a list and puts number-one-son
Kenny in charge then yes... SJU has a very strong policy that says that
what Kenny says goes and any subscriber that annoys him, including his
Dad, either does as he says or leaves the list.  This isn't intuitively
"right" to a subscriber population that may view the List Owner as an
technically oriented appointee of a higher authority.  As Pete points out,
if we charged for our server then Kenny's Dad would probably be signing
the checks and would be registered as the final authority.  But we don't
charge and there's nothing in the header that even defines the concept
to the users.

As far as SJU goes, I'll eventually set up a registration list and let
the owners have the option of posting a public declaration of who this
final authority is, if need be.  But an obvious place for it would be
in a protected comment in the header.

As an aside, observations that these problems exist primarily within our
external community are appreciated.  This server is the outgrowth of a
series of experiments (of the "what if" as opposed to mouse-in-maze
variety) of a former psychology professor and administrativly convenient
regulation wasn't a priority.
                                           -Kary