At 10:34 12/16/2003 Tuesday, Karl Signell wrote: >At 05:56 PM 12/15/03 -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote: > >>>Is this a bug-like feature? Namely, shouldn't a Postmaster be able to >>>GET any list under his jurisdiction without additional fol-de-rol? >> >>No, it wouldn't make to have a security setting for a list that people >>could ignore at their will. > >My question was shouldn't the Postmaster (not "people" in general) >automatically have immediate access to all lists? What security purpose is >served by forcing the Postmaster to carry out an intermediate step to gain >access? DEL * *@*