Perhaps I am missing something, but there is an advantage to Peers lists which
the Mail-via=Distribute  will not  address. One  of the  main functions  of my
LISTSERV is the maintenance of notebooks on all of the lists which are carried
here. I am not going to get rid of my lists just because someone else wants to
do direct distribution because I'm not  ready to take the giant step backwards
and start maintaining notebooks by hand again.
 
This means there will  still be a NODMGT-L here at  UGA, with some subscribers
who still have to  be told that they can't send mail back  to the address they
received it  from in  the first  place. I think  that the  best solution  is a
combination of  both systems, with enough  Peer servers around the  network to
provide a nearby address that people can send to and with mail being forwarded
between servers (and subscribers) via distribute.
 
Bill Rubin says  he prefers Distribute since it gives  a single person control
of the lists.  I don't have any  problem with a single  person controlling the
lists,  in fact,  I will  peer link  all  of my  BITNIC lists  to theirs,  put
INFO@BITNIC in the list  header as the only owner, and  then proceed to forget
these lists exist.  They can have complete control over  adding, deleting, and
moving people from list to list. I just want the lists here for the purpose of
maintaining notebooks, which by  the way, are on the other side  of the CUNY -
PSUVM - OHSTVMA links from BITNIC and cut down on network traffic across these
critical links for anyone  in the mid-west or south who  wants to order copies
of the notebooks.
 
Harold