Earlier this morning, I had posted another answer (now deleted). But on my way to the chocolate shop I've realized it answered a different (and much easier) question I must have dreamed of... 

In addition, and what is perhaps more interesting, I remembered that Georges Grekos had told me of work by T. Šalát on the very question in the OP. Here is a reference:

> T. Šalát, *On subseries*, Math. Zeitschr. **85** (1964), 209-225.

There, Šalát proves, among other things, the following:

> **Theorem.** Let $(a_n)_{n \ge 1}$ be a non-increasing sequence of non-negative real numbers such that $a_n \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$ and $\liminf_n n a_n > 0$. If $(\varepsilon_n)_{n \ge 1}$ is a $\{0,1\}$-valued sequence for which $\sum_{n \ge 1} \varepsilon_n a_n < \infty$, then $\lim_n \frac{1}{n} \sum_{k=1}^n \varepsilon_n = 0$.

This is Theorem 1 in Šalát's paper, which also investigates the logical strength of the assumptions made in the previous statement. In particular, Note 2 on p. 211 shows that, at least in general, you can't replace the hypothesis that $\liminf_n n a_n > 0$ in the above thereom with the weaker condition that $\sum_{n \ge 1} a_n = \infty$. For this, Šalát considers the sequence $(a_n)_{n \ge 1}$ defined by letting $a_{n^n + k} := n^{-(n+2)}$ for all $n, k \in \bf N$ such that $0 \le k < (n+1)^n - n^n$.

Incidentally, Šalát mentions that his theorem is actually a generalization of previous results from:

> J. Krzyś, *A theorem of Olivier and its generalizations*, Prace math. **2** (1956), 159-164 (in Polish)

and

> L. Moser, *On the series $\sum 1/p$*, Amer. Math. Monthly **65** (1958), 104-105,

which focus on the case where $a_n = \frac{1}{n}$ for all $n$. 

For the record, the "theorem of Olivier" alluded to in the title of Krzyś's paper is the same for which Igor Rivin has provided a reference [here][1] (that's why I remembered of this story, I guess).


  [1]: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/211174/who-was-were-the-first-to-note-that-if-sum-x-in-x-frac1x-infty-the