There was indeed a problem specific to list locking in addition to the "failure to recognize new value of keywords" that was fixed by 16E-002O. The GET command was modified in release 1.6a to provide the date/time and userid of the person who locked the list; at the same time, the keywords processor was changed to return that data along with the YES/NO indication, and for some unknown reason (looking at the 1.6a code) I had written "Pull" instead of "Parse pull". After the keywords processor was entirely rewritten for 1.6e I stopped having "special case" code for the LOCKED keyword, and it was no longer upcased (and indeed I do *not* want it upcased since it contains an e-mail address which might have a lowercase userid). Unfortunately some EXEC's couldn't cope with a mixed case answer, hence the "not locked" answer you were getting. An updated copy of the EXEC's in question is available as 16E-005O FIX (again, it's "zero zero blah oh" not "zero zero blah zero", I'm sorry for this naming convention but all the IBM terminals I have used make it impossible to confuse 0 and O unless you're blind as a mole, looking at my colleagues' ASCII terminals I see that this can indeed be a *serious* problem with other terminals...) Eric