>deal with it all at once and know more >about eaching incoming message. [I may have misunderstood what the above writer was trying to convey. My comments below are based on what I did surmise.] I disagree. I don't see it as my job, as listowner, to determine how list members process e-mail. Everyone has different intellectual/reading styles, and I see no reason to make all sizes fit one style. I offer the following instruction in a rotating bottom banner for placing the listname at the beginning of all Subject: lines: Force Subject: [THYROID] - mailto:[log in to unmask] Any member can cause all list messages to have the [LISTNAME] at the beginning of all Subject: lines by sending the command set LISTNAME SUBJ to the appropriate LISTSERV server. If, perchance, the LISTOWNER was inclined to *force* all current list members to have the name of the list at the beginning of all Subject: lines (something I do not suggest, for reasons mentioned above), then the listowner can issue this command: set LISTNAME SUBJ for *@* If the LISTOWNER was also inclined to force all future list members to have the name of the list at the beginning of all Subject: lines (something I do not suggest, for reasons mentioned above), then the listowner can add SUBJ to the default settings for new members. Savvy LISTSERV members, when confronted with lists so configured, can turn the SUBJ off and go back to life without the Subject: beginning with the LISTNAME on all messages. My guess would be that the command would be something like this: set LISTNAME NOSUBJ >narrowing of the bandwidth for information >about incoming email If the LISTNAME has been chosen carefully, it will contain the smallest appropriate number of characters. My list names are 7 or 8 characters. Adding [] and a space, we have, say, 10 to 12 characters, right? Those 10 to 12 characters are in prime real estate, at the beginning of the Subject: line. However, many e-mail programs can now display several dozen characters on the Subject: line. Because I prefer leave this matter up to members' own preferences, I see no significant loss. >more efficient to create a filter Could you please share with this group your typical instructions for how to create a filter? While I personally do use that kind of filtering, I do not presume to insist that all list members process incoming information in the same way that I do. Many of my list members are too ill, or too computer illiterate, or too contra-authoritarian to be forced into building filters rather than using the simple SUBJ tool that is built into our fine LISTSERV. If set LISTNAME NOSUBJ helps them, and if it is their first step to begin to process their e-mail in a "modern" fashion, I say, more power to them.