Eric, your personal habits for using LISTSERV are essentially irrelevant. Whether or not *you* review lists to find out whether or not someone is on them, people do it. Whether or not *you* review lists to get header information, people do it. Remember, with the state of the documentation (which frequently exists only in the archives of LSTSRV-L), what people know about LISTSERV may be wildly behind the state of the code. It seems to me that you are denigrating the privacy issue far too much with your "tongue in cheek" response to Thomas. The issue of the remote owner's right to control the list versus the local postmaster's responsibility to keep the names private versus the lack of contractual control over the remove owner should not just be laughed away, either. Certainly, if I were Thomas and I was concerned about a remote owner's ethical maturity (i.e., his or her willingness to maintain the privacy of the list subscribers), then I would probably take one of two actions, based on the level of my concern: A. Get a signed statement of understanding from the remote owner, stating he or she understands the privacy issue and will respect the same. B. Refuse to allow remote list owners, and insist on having only local list owners. I don't know for sure what effect this would have on a peered list, where a list owner adds someone to the list and the add request is forwarded to a list where he or she is not the owner. Richard