| I thought it would be difficult to get smartlist to not send | a copy to the sender and only to all the other addresses in dist, | but it wasn't. That's good, Greg, since it's what you want, but it brings this question up: why? When I post to a mailing list, getting a copy as a subscriber lets me know that (and when) it was sent out to the membership, what edits a moderator may have made, and what the list software may have done to it (reformatting, abusive spell-checking, adding ads, whatever). Otherwise I'd have to dig into the archives every time (what if the list is not archived, or the archived versions do not match the distributed form?) to find all that out, and I'd probably end up lurking under a second address just to see my own posts (let's hope it's not a posting-required list). Even its being quoted in someone else's follow-up wouldn't answer the last two questions (something might have been changed in a part that the other poster didn't quote). Also, sometimes a person can phrase something in a way that makes sense in the writer's mind at the time but reads oddly to other people, or one can let a typo slip through that changes the meaning, and only in seeing one's text again later can one realize that the position was stated poorly or incorrectly. Yet the question of how to do that comes up so much that it's even discussed in the Smartlist distribution; it's far from being new with Greg. Why would a list administrator want to keep members from seeing how their posts look to other members?