PE> I referred you to the AREAFIX.TXT document.  If you
PE> want the message where I referred to areafix.txt, I'll resend it.

RM> Got that one,

PE> Make up your mind.  You either got the message, or you didn't.  It was the
PE> SAME MESSAGE.  I said you used the wrong command,

RM>  Not quite. You said I'd used the equivalent of Query,
RM> instead of List. 

Any people accuse me of being obscure?!

RM> According to the Areafix docs I have, that should
RM> have done the job. Why does it not? Why does it seem to give only a
RM> partial list?

Are you referring to my AREAFIX.TXT?  It actually doesn't document %QUERY,
just lists it as "a command", and you're supposed to guess
that maybe "%HELP" will give you more information about "%QUERY".

I didn't actually say I'd read the areafix docs myself though.

However, emperical evidence leads me to conclude that %QUERY returns what
areas are actually active on the system (ie flowing into my system each
day), whilst %LIST returns a file which I created (availmsg.txt), which is
what I can potentially (and automatically) provide to you.

PE>  freq areafix.txt to get
PE> the right command.  %LIST is what you need.

RM> Assorted file requests and experimental areafix msgs coming with
RM> this packet. Apologies if they cause stuffups. On second thoughts,
RM> tough.

Any problems via the documented method, please report.

RM> but I was being an obdurate bastard and trying to get
RM> you to acknowledge that the documented -q switch to areafix was
RM> giving me an apparently incomplete list. You win, I give up, I'll
RM> req the txt now.

PE> I can't be bothered looking up "obdurate".  BFN.  Paul.

RM> Shouldn't that be "I'm too obdurate to look up obdurate"?

Tell me what it means, and I'll let you know.  BFN.  Paul. 
@EOT:

---