I've recently done the same thing due to the death of the LISTSERV at
   GITVM1 (Georgia Tech).
 
>   Basically, I need to move about 250 subscribers from UTARLVM1 to
 
   (I think my LISTSERV maintainer will be happy to hear about this) :)
 
>or would
>1.) MOVE all users (except the GAMES-L@BROWNVM entry) from UTARLVM1 to BROWNVM
>2.) Get both lists, locking them, edit out the Peer keyword, and put the
>lists back.
 
   I believe that this is the appropriate method of moving people over.
   If possible, I suggest picking a time after 5pm Central to keep the
   folks here at UTARLVM1 happy.  Make sure you wait until after the
   MOVE is completed before locking both lists or the MOVE will be
   unable to be processed.  Oh, and list subscriptions will be moved
   back to the defaults.  In other words, if someone is set to NOMAIL,
   they'll be reset to the MAIL option (assuming that MAIL is the
   default).
 
>   When I decommissioned my GREARN peer before that mainframe went down, I
>started receiving errors that there was an inconsistancy in the
>Network-Wide List ID. What problem is the message indicative of, and how
>to I solve it?
 
   I checked with one of the American higher-ups about this when
   I saw the same thing.  He informed me that it was an automated
   warning that their picture of the peers does not reflect the
   modifications you've made.  He also told me that it is updated
   every few weeks, so all you need to do is ignore them for a
   while and they'll go away.
 
   BTW, I'll mention your intentions to my LISTSERV maintainer and
   let you know if he has anything special to include.
 
                                                Brad Samek
                                              [log in to unmask]