At first glance, the following message looked like evidence of the message stuttering that Scott has been complaining about, but the "received" tags suggest otherwise. Does this mean that VM-UTIL might be improperly peered together? For reference, here are excerpts from the list definition: * * VM Utilities Discussion List * * Review= Public Subscription= Open ... * Peers= OHSTVMA,DEARN,TECMTYVM,MARIST,UBVM,UCF1VM,UTARLVM1 * Peers= TREARN ... * * MARIST * | * TECMTYVM <-> UTARLVM1 <-> OHSTVMA <-> UBVM <-> DEARN <-> TREARN * | * UCF1VM Here is the rejection notice: >Date: Wed, 10 Oct 90 12:30:09 EDT >From: Revised List Processor (1.6e) <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Rejected posting to VM-UTIL@UBVM >To: [log in to unmask] > >Your message is being returned to you unprocessed because it seems to have been >already sent to the VM-UTIL list.... >------------------------- Rejected message (34 lines) ------------------------- >Received: from TREARN.BITNET by ubvm.BITNET (Mailer R2.05) with BSMTP id 0798; > Wed, 10 Oct 90 12:28:09 EDT >Received: by TREARN (Mailer R2.07) id 0393; Wed, 10 Oct 90 18:29:35 TUR >Received: from ubvm.BITNET by TREARN.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 0391; > Wed, 10 Oct 90 18:29:29 TUR >Received: by UBVM (Mailer R2.05) id 0758; Wed, 10 Oct 90 12:25:28 EDT >Received: from OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU by ubvm.BITNET (Mailer R2.05) with > BSMTP id 0753; Wed, 10 Oct 90 12:25:06 EDT >Received: by OHSTVMA (Mailer R2.07) id 8945; Wed, 10 Oct 90 12:27:11 EDT >Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]> >Newsgroups: bit.listserv.vm-util >Date: Wed, 10 Oct 90 12:10:00 EDT >Reply-To: VM Utilities Discussion List <VM-UTIL@TREARN> >Sender: VM Utilities Discussion List <VM-UTIL@TREARN> >From: "John F. Chandler" <PEPMNT@CFAAMP> >Subject: Re: Time mod for CP >X-LSVRepTo: >X-LSVopts: MSGACK Org=VM-UTIL@TREARN >X-LSVvia: VM-UTIL@OHSTVMA VM-UTIL@UBVM VM-UTIL@TREARN >To: $PEER$ <VM-UTIL@UBVM> >In-Reply-To: [log in to unmask] message of Tue, 9 Oct 90 16:51:43 EDT > >... text deleted ...