On Sat, 16 Mar 1996 13:36:27 -0500 Philo <[log in to unmask]> said: >Your reply that even though a large number of listowners wanted it, and >I only remember seeing two that didn't (which could be solved with a >switch), First off, we need to keep things in proportion here. A *small* number of list owners (say a dozen or so) said they wanted it. An even smaller number said they did not want it. Thousands of other list owners said nothing. From this I concluded that this would be a good feature to add as time permits. However, this is not the only feature that it would be good to add as time permits. Everything has to be prioritized. >you told us that you had better things to do with your programming time, >and we should just deal with it. No, I said our programming time was currently spent on items with a higher priority. This doesn't mean it will never get done, but it does mean it is not going to get done right now. Eric