Ben Parker was reported to have said: >At L-Soft, we use LISTSERV lists in many unusual or untypical ways. It's a >bit different but think of it as kind of a 'reverse' list (many -> few) >instead of a more normal list usage (few -> many or many -> many). List Owner >addresses for our Hosting customers of course go to those customer List Owners >who do respond in the usual, personal way as each sees fit. But L-Soft lists >generally get no such personal response from the List Owner. You are supposed >to write to the correct Address as publicly stated so your message gets to the >(small) group of (list subscribers) who are really the people you want to >reach with your query. As a long-time (aka "old") list-owner and a person who has helped many university departments setup mail accounts, advertize contact addresses, change ownership addresses, I agree: It is most helpful to use "role" accounts and other impersonal aliases for official organizational functions. This helps eliminate many and diverse updates to published contact info, which (published info) has the 1/2 life of the infamous Craig Shergold Make-a-wish Foundation request. Folks come and go, take vacation, sick leave. Having a list (and an archive) helps with so many of those issues. Though I'm not sure that it has been used in a meaningful way when a peer list of owners and subscribers are involved, I had once thought that a list definition (let's call it "B") that had some keywords such as: OWNER= primary_owner,(B) REPLY-TO= LIST,RESPECT NOTEBOOK= ...PRIVATE... would be extremely useful if a subscriber was unavailable, anyone on the list could turn off (or on) the other's options. /P