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  *    *@*