Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!werner
From: werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: "Un-Mail"
Message-ID: <2999@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 26-Feb-86 02:16:10 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.2999
Posted: Wed Feb 26 02:16:10 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Feb-86 03:04:18 EST
References: <1465@gitpyr.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: UTexas Computation Center, Austin, Texas
Lines: 23

RE:
>  How can this un-mail be effectively
>  controlled?  How is this practice different from simple
>  littering in the eyes of the law?

Ah yes, one of my favorite problems, which seem to have no easy answer.
What bothers me is that the US PO should be able to tell me who may or may
not use my mail-box.  Well, ok, there are a few good arguments for that
set-up (don't anyone waste any time to follow-up or mail me with those),
but everyone in this country seems to think that has to be that way - it
doesn't and works well diffently in other countries.

One solution to avoid wet newspapers and clutter in my yard was a second
mail-box *NOT UNDER P.O. RESTRICTIONS* - now the only problem is how to get
those folks to use them!!  The newspaperboy, of course, would have to spend
a lot more time to put the paper into my box, rather than just throwing it in
the yard .... and I sympathize with the *little man* at the end of the
distribution channel.  I guess, maybe in the suburbs with "here a house, there
another" density, I'll never convince them, short of a city-ordinance *with
teeth and bite*;  but in high-density housing like condos or townhouses
with central mail-boxes, maybe a second set of "non-mail"-boxes would work.

---Werner