I think where I'm going with this is that "Listowner" is a pretty clear term that, unfortuately, may not apply to who has the final authority over the list. If the Jones clan starts a list and puts number-one-son Kenny in charge then yes... SJU has a very strong policy that says that what Kenny says goes and any subscriber that annoys him, including his Dad, either does as he says or leaves the list. This isn't intuitively "right" to a subscriber population that may view the List Owner as an technically oriented appointee of a higher authority. As Pete points out, if we charged for our server then Kenny's Dad would probably be signing the checks and would be registered as the final authority. But we don't charge and there's nothing in the header that even defines the concept to the users. As far as SJU goes, I'll eventually set up a registration list and let the owners have the option of posting a public declaration of who this final authority is, if need be. But an obvious place for it would be in a protected comment in the header. As an aside, observations that these problems exist primarily within our external community are appreciated. This server is the outgrowth of a series of experiments (of the "what if" as opposed to mouse-in-maze variety) of a former psychology professor and administrativly convenient regulation wasn't a priority. -Kary