<I did specify REMOTE lists > ok - apparently I ( and Nick and ? ) have a semantics and/or forest-and-trees type problem on this subject. my problem - I have a VERY active local user who was badly hurt and will be unable to access the net for weeks/months. for local lists, I said ( as postmast ( I thought ) ): set * nomail for Z47W32A4@* and all 20-odd local lists ( person works from multiple node-names ) were updated. I then started on remote lists - I tried: ( note - in most cases, I did do a query first, but was trying to avoid typing long and/or gatewayed nodenames so I simply 'retrieved' and modified my QUERY command ) tell listserv at ubvm set fact-l nomail for Z47W32A4@* Ready; T=0.03/0.04 14:57:46 DMTRGX171I From UBVM(LISTSERV): * You are not the owner of the FACT-L list. DMTRGX171I From UBVM(LISTSERV): * DMTRGX171I From UBVM(LISTSERV): * No entry updated. tell listserv at ubvm for Z47W32A4@albnyvms set fact-l nomail Ready; T=0.03/0.04 14:58:46 RDR FILE 7560 SENT FROM MAILER PUN WAS 3374 RECS 0019 CPY 001 M NOHOLD NOKEEP * New mail from "L-Soft list server at UBVM (1.8a)" * <[log in to unmask]> tell listserv at rpitsvm for Z47W32A4@albnyvms set intercom nomail Ready; T=0.03/0.04 15:07:00 DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * Your delivery options have been successfully set DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * to "NOMAIL". You are being mailed a short report DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * with the exact settings now in use for your DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * subscription. Please take a few moments to check DMTRGX171I From RPITSVM(LISTSERV): * that this is indeed what you wanted. if my original format was what a listowner would say, what is the correct way a postmast should proceed in this situation. Are only listowners allowed to use wildcards in a SET command while remote postmasts as well as listowners are allowed to use them in query commands ? -mike