Let's say that a line monitor somewhere in the world decides to hold a file for a long period of time (eg until the next weekend), or to split it into small chunks on which he furthermore runs a complex encoding program that reduces the chunks to 1/3rd of their original size, but then 1 damaged bit (base RSCS V2 *grin*) means the file is turned into a jelly-fish. Let's say that the postmaster asks LISTSERV to send notification to the file owners about this, just in case they might think that their file has been lost and they'd wish to resend it. The questions is: should we inform the SENDER, the RECIPIENT, or BOTH? 1. S&R are human people. You ought to inform the sender, because otherwise he might think the file has been lost and might resend it. You ought to inform the recipient, because otherwise he might get anxious and that's not good for his peace-maker. But that's less important, the sender might inform him if he starts asking "you sure you DID send that darned file??" This is quite common. Score: S=1/0, R=0.5/0, F=1 (copy to Sender: pro/con, id for recipient, Frequency). 2. S=server, R=human. Then you must only inform R, who might get anxious and order a second copy, but not S, who might get upset and tell you to try HELP, yeah, you might be more lucky with a HELP command. This case is quite common (although servers rarely send large files, MAILERs tend to). S=0/1 R=1/0 F=1 3. S=human, R=server. For the same reason as above R should not be informed, and S should. But S is supposed to be somehow intelligent (idiots don't send files to servers, esp not large ones) and will check the links for his file. And that case is pretty rare anyway, so S=0.5/0 R=0/1 F=0.25 4. S&R are servers who won't get upset about network delays. S=R=0/1, and since this is VERY rare, F=0.1. Final scores: S=1 Pros 1.125 Cons 1.1 R=1 Pros 1.5 Cons 0.225 Do you agree with this analysis, and what would you decide about sending the notification to the sender or not? Eric