When you go to the web-page link below, if you scroll down you will see 
a blank where you can enter your e-mail address.  This takes you to a 
different page, where you can have the program mail your previously 
arbitrarily and never revealed to you password to you in an unencrypted 
message.

Then you go back to the link, enter your e-mail address and the password 
you just received in the Current Password blank and then enter the new 
password you want and retype it in the next blank as well and your 
password is now changed and you can have it e-mailed to you whenever you 
want.

It does suggest somewhere on that page to be sure not to use an 
important password (I guess that means one you might also use for more 
secure sites) because it is supposed to be e-mailed to us as a reminder 
once a month.

It is certainly not very well laid out, and you do need to scroll down 
to see the important parts to get into the inner workings.



Andrew Stiller wrote:

>>One problem coming along with all the others is that there has been a change
>>in passwords. Any use of the old password makes change of individual list
>>settings impossible.
>>
>>However one can have the new password mailed. As I want to stay on the list,
>>I just changed the password back to something, that i can remember.
>>
>>Klaus
>>
> 
> And how is *that* done? I tried to unsubscribe at the height of the
> multiple-digests crisis, and found I could not do so because I had to enter
> a password no-one had ever communicated to me. I also sent a message
> purportedly to the list administrator asking to be unsubscribed, but it
> bounced back to me. Do messages to Henry even get through?
> 
> And while I'm at it, I would like to register a very strong dissent to
> those who would censure anyone who got angry at the situation. The fault is
> not Henry's, but that was not immediately apparent, and there definitely
> was an ethical meltdown *somewhere* at SHSU, since list administrators
> could easily have been notified in advance. The notion that one has no
> right to complain of destructive deficiencies in a free service does not
> bear the slightest inspection and is morally odious in the extreme. (Has
> one, e.g., no right to complain of a virus in a freeware app.?)
> 
> Andrew Stiller
> Kallisti Music Press
> 
> http://www.kallistimusic.com
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Finale mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> 


-- 
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to