Thanks to all who responded regarding my subscribing a list to another list
in order to for it to act as a subset.  My puzzle has been solved.  By
setting the reply-to: header on list-B, it performs perfectly.  That is,
the reply-to field holds the address of the higher level listserv list
(list-A).  I would have tried the super-list suggestion but, we are only
running listserv 1.8b.

Thanks again, I'm a happy camper.
Randy H.
University of Arkansas


At 09:36 AM 2/4/97 -5, you wrote:
>On  3 Feb 97, Randy Holder <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hope it's ok to ask this here and it is not a faq. I tried checking the faq
>> and didn't see it.
>>
>> Ok here's the situation:
>>
>> I manage two listserv lists; both are closed to the public and are for our
>> staff.  List A is the larger more general list.  List B is a specialized
>> group of staff and therefore is a subset of list A. I want persons on List
>> B to receive posts from List A in addition to normal posts. So, I've
>> subscribed List B to List A. This eliminates the need to subscribe new
>> hires to both lists.
>>
>> This works well except that when List B distributes a post that was
>> originally sent to List A, it replaces the reply-to: header with its own
>> reply-to address.  So no one on list B can tell which list the post came
>> from. That causes another problem. If someone on list B replies to the
>> post, it only get's distributed on list B.
>
>Why not make List A a super-list which includes list B as a sublist?
>
>Then you subscribe people to either List A or List B. When you send
>mail to List A it goes to both sets of subscribers; when you send to
>List B it only goes to List B. Replies should work as needed.
>
>Francoise
>
>