At 7:44 PM -0600 05/27/01, Ben Parker wrote: >No need [for invisible test]. The user is notifed when they have >been served back on. At 12:21 AM -0400 05/28/01, Roger Fajman wrote: >Served out and served off mean the same thing. LISTSERV accepts both >................... >Any command to LISTSERV will do. If you get a response, you are not >served out. >NOPOST is not forced by SERVE OUT. At 12:43 AM -0500 05/28/01, Mary Siegel wrote: >I know some have been saying that the computer sends them a message >when they are served again..... Maybe they work, maybe they don't. >However, one failsafe way would be for you to put them on Review and >have them send a message. Then you can stop the message, let them >know it came through, and lift the restriction. _______ Thanks you all on all counts. Yes, Listserve sends both me and the subscriber, notice that he has been served again, but I like the added hands-on of verification -- if only to know that he read/understood the notice! Review is an ELEGANT solution! At least for Classic. In LITE, I can ask the subscriber verify by sending command and telling me if he does NOT get response. Finally, I am very comforted to know that Listserv-speak allows for prepositional ambiguity :>) ___________________ Jane-Kerin Moffat <[log in to unmask]>