Re: [Mailman-Users] how to arrange a list with 'affiliate' members

2004-05-11 Thread Barnaby Scott
this project would of course be welcome. The principle seems pretty straightforward, but making it fool-proof is a bit harder. --- "Stephen J. Turnbull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> "Barnaby" == Barnaby Scott > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: &

Re: [Mailman-Users] lists that are members of each other - bad idea?

2004-05-10 Thread Barnaby Scott
Kinda what I feared! Does anyone have any suggestions about my original query then (about 'affilate' members a couple of threads back)? Thanks --- Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 12:06 AM -0700 2004/05/10, Barnaby Scott wrote: > > > Does anyone know th

[Mailman-Users] lists that are members of each other - bad idea?

2004-05-10 Thread Barnaby Scott
I posted a question a couple of days ago about a particular Mailman set-up I wanted to achieve, but have since thought it would be better to ask a simpler and more specific question: Does anyone know the consequences of setting up two lists which are members of each other? I don't want to do some

[Mailman-Users] how to arrange a list with 'affiliate' members

2004-05-08 Thread Barnaby Scott
I am trying to configure a list or group of lists to exhibit the following behaviour, but have been having trouble: I run a list called 'discuss', which is a discussion list for members of our organisation. We would also like to invite a handful of people to be 'affiliate' members, but who would n