At 09:11 PM 3/1/00 -0500, Lee wrote: >I saved your message for future study. In my initial reading, I'm not sure >I noticed an example of command structure, but will look again and think >further. Thanks. Are you sure? I bet on the scrap heap. ;-) >BTW, the original message I got when I first signed is now consigned to a >scrap heap along with the computer I was using at the time. What about this? *>By sending "index scuba-l" and then "get" commands to *>[log in to unmask], you can get recent archives. This is in Nick and Don's Periodic Posting of Scuba-L Guidelines and Info, for those who have trashed this and other LISTSERV Intro messages to readers (including how to SIGN OFF). Have they been systematically consigned to your trash heap too? Lee, if you spend 1/1000 of the time you spend posting here and in rec.scuba.* on READING a few basic essential FACTS relating to your posting environment, to help solidify the factual basis of your recall of what others posted, it would greatly enhance the value and quality of your discussions. I mean this as a constructive comment in response to your rather callous remark about trashing the LISTSERV Intro you were supposed to keep, and then CONTINUE to ignore what's posted every other week by Nick -- to REMIND you (and others) what they have trashed. You apparently ignored them, and what was posted under >To get you started, here is the result of "help info": ------------------------------------------------------- My reply to your question started with your comment on this: >>> A single LISTSERV command using GET could retrieve anything >>> within the past 11 months. That presumes a reader either knew about the GET command from the LISTSERV intro, or read it in Nick's Scuba-L Guideline: *>By sending "index scuba-l" and then "get" commands to *>[log in to unmask], you can get recent archives. Your comment to what I said about "GET" was: >>You could write and someone undoubtedly has written books >>about what I don't know about listserv. Bob and others >>clearly know more than I do on this subject. While we're >>making proposals, I have one. Forgive me if it's >>already been done and I failed to notice. So, I posted the RESULT of "help info" in which you would have found info about GET and other commands ... if you had bothered to spend just a LITTLE time on it. If you don't have the time to read two lines, or half a page to find out how to do things, you're not going to know, Lee. LIST readers are not BORN with that knowledge. But one must have to invest and expend a teeny tiny bit of effort to acquire the know how. -- Bob.