> When a post is posted by a sub-list subscriber, all (both > > super and sub) get the post, ...EXCEPT the sub-list poster. Which we want to happen. I have gone round and round with this, since i have others setup similar, and they seem to work how we want them to work. Somewhere a keyword is nulling out the other is my guess. ...read all the docs over and over......that goes nowhere. I do not want to make any changes to the sub-list since that is built and I shouldn't have to I just wnat to grab the subscribers. And besides it works prior. I am still expermenting. The logs show clearly what is happening. thanks. On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Rauch wrote: > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Michele Francis wrote: > > Yes, i have a super-list with 10 subscribers and a sub-list > > with 40+ subscribers. When a post is posted by the > > super-list subscriber, all (both super and sub) get the post > > and the poster gets a copy of the message. So repro is > > working. > > OK. > > > When a post is posted by a sub-list subscriber, all (both > > super and sub) get the post, ... > > Do you mean, "When a post is posted TO THE SUPERLIST by a > sub-list subscriber, all (both super and sub) get the post, > ..."? > > If so, that means this person is either ALSO a subscriber to the > superlist, or that the superlist has "send= public" (otherwise, > how could his postings get posted to that superlist?). > > If not, then there's more to your lists' configuration than > you're telling/aware of?? E.g., these "sub-list subscribers" are > owners/editors of the superlist. > > > > but the poster never gets a copy of the message, which we > > want to happen. So repro doesn't work for the sub-list.... > > No. Assuming your description is strictly correct (which frankly > I don't understand why), then if the person is ONLY a sub-list > subscriber AND somehow gets to post to the SUPERlist (as you > stated), then he wouldn't expect to receive a REPRO from that > SUPERlist since he's not subscribed to it. REPRO applies to list > subscribers, not to "public" posters. One might think that he > still should have received the posting from the sublist (simply > as one of the SUBlist subscribers --not because he authored the > SUPERlist posting). So, it would seem that LISTSERV is pruning > the list of recipients in an odd way (Remember Pete Weiss' > observation regarding LISTSERV's behavior). (Or, your > description above is wrong about who is posting where and not > receiving whatever?) > > Peter R > > > So, how is the superlist know not to send a copy of the > > message to the sub-list poster????? How? I don't know. > > > > thanks for all the help.....I appreciate it. >