[Ranjan Maitra]

On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 12:16:12 -0500 Michael Miles <mmamiga6 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:20:38 -0500 David<dgboles at gmail.com>  wrote:
> >
> >    
> >> On 10/7/2010 12:09 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> >>      
> >>>    On 10/7/10 11:19 AM, David wrote:
> >>>        
> >>>> But remember that not all blank Subject: emails are spam. Sometimes a
> >>>> Newbie posts like that and it is a legitimate question or problem. As
> >>>> well as the replies.
> >>>>          
> >>> The list admins will probably hate this, but it could be more effective
> >>> for the Mailman s/w to return such mail to sender with the comment that
> >>> all mail to the list must have a non-empty Subject line. That could
> >>> actually help the newbies and in general the spammers won't bother replying.
> >>>        
> >>
> >> Good idea. If that is possible (I don't doubt you) I wonder why no one
> >> thought of it before now? I like that solution much more than just 'kill
> >> file' or ignoring the post.  :-)
> >>      
> > Excellent idea. I try drilling into students that it is a security risk
> > to send e-mail without subject.
> >
> > Ranjan
> >    
> Basic rule here...
> 
> No header, no read...just delete
> 

Nice rule, except that it can not always be enforced. 

Ranjan