This is from one listowner's viewpoint (the one that started all this). Some listowners of larger lists sometimes, maybe not often, but definitely from time to time, need to change the sub options of a fairly significant portion of the subs while leaving the others untouched. Generally this will come about when installing a feature previously unused by the list in question (and thank you, Eric, for all of the things you have given us to work with). For example, you decide you want to install Renewal, but you want it to apply only to those subs set nomail. That means you need a list of the nomail subs. If the coding in the list were readily understandable, or a translation table were available, the easiest way to do this would be to work from the list itself, which has been gotten with nolock. Given that the coding isn't all that transparent, one is left with query and scan. Scan gives output which can be quickly edited into a list or just addresses (which is what is wanted) but you can't check options with it. The new "with" option for query is great. The problem is the output, newly designed so the subscriber can, maybe, easily understand it (of course, three quarters of them never use it, they ask the listowner) is a real pain for the listowner. Each entry is about a screen in length. If you are working with an output of 1,302 subscribers, about a third of your list, which is what I'm currently doing, it is not a great deal of fun to extract the addresses from the "query with" output so you can be sure you change only those subscriptions which you want changed to meet the new setup. Here's the proposal part. Maybe change query so that listowners, when using "with", can have the option of getting the output as only address and name, and maybe another option so the output is simply the addresses. If we are using "with" we don't, most of the time, really want to see the rest of the option settings for each of the subscriptions. Or, enable scan to search for options rather than names and addresses, when we use a special option. The output of scan is fairly easy to compile a special list from. What we, or at least I, want is sort of an amalgam of "query with" and scan. I don't care whether scan is modified, or query is modified (and I'ld probably be satisfied if you kept the "with" option and just gave us back the option of the old style output when we want it) or an all new command is created. Just something, so that when we need it (or even just think we need it) we can get a simple listing of all the subscribers whose options are set a particular way. If we've got something like that we don't need to bug you about an explanation of the code. So, can you think about that? Can you give us something of that sort? You might not see why we want something like that, but a lot of us can. And this sort of thing comes up about every year and a half, which sort of indicates it ain't going to go away. Douglas