Article View: phl.singles
Article #542Re: Great Expectations (Dating Service) WARNING!
From: Sean Malloy
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 1995 00:00
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 1995 00:00
29 lines
2727 bytes
2727 bytes
thelarch@kalypso.cybercom.net (The Larch) wrote:
>I've often thought that if everyone returned business reply cards for
>products or services in which they were uninterested empty or with a
>polite "No, thanks", there'd be a lot less junk mail. Or at least
>lower postal rates.
Back when companies that put bound-in ad sheets in magazines would
sometimes use a gummed reply form with directions to stick it to an
envelope to send your reply (which form would usually become stuck to
the facing page, tearing it when you tried to peel it loose), rather
than making a two-sided business reply card out of it, I checked with
a post office and verified that, yes, if you pasted that form to a
larger package, the company would have to pay first class return
postage on it. I then return-mailed about a dozen bricks carefully
wrapped in wrapping paper. Not long afterward, these stick-on reply
forms disappeared. I checked, you can't do it with the business reply
cards.
Another trick I used when I had access to the materials was to cut
1/8" lead sheet to size to fit into business reply envelops and mail
them back.
--
Sean R. Malloy | American Non Sequitur
Naval Medical Center | Society
San Diego, CA 92134-5000 |
malloy@cris.com | "We may not make sense,
srmalloy@snd10.med.navy.mil | but we do like pizza"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<44i4m6$hgi@spectator.cris.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<43b22b$24e@news.voicenet.com> <43c800$hip@keystone.intergate.net> <43nq9r$q23@masala.cc.uh.edu> <43o3pq$g24_003@slip.netaxs.com> <THELARCH.95Sep22145435@kalypso.cybercom.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10c68b,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gid10c68b,public X-Google-Thread: fbf61,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gidfbf61,public X-Google-Thread: fb8b9,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gidfb8b9,public X-Google-Thread: f8a21,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gidf8a21,public X-Google-Thread: f4f15,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4f15,public X-Google-Thread: f4eb9,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4eb9,public X-Google-Thread: 110235,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gid110235,public X-Google-Thread: 10a5b2,c8519196af01104 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a5b2,public From: malloy@cris.com (Sean Malloy) Subject: Re: Great Expectations (Dating Service) WARNING! Date: 1995/09/30 Message-ID: <44i4m6$hgi@spectator.cris.com> X-Deja-AN: 111000964 references: <43b22b$24e@news.voicenet.com> <43c800$hip@keystone.intergate.net> <43nq9r$q23@masala.cc.uh.edu> <43o3pq$g24_003@slip.netaxs.com> <THELARCH.95Sep22145435@kalypso.cybercom.net> organization: Bureau of Natural Disasters, Planning Division newsgroups: phl.singles,phl.misc,atl.singles,ba.personals,ba.singles,dfw.personals,dfw.singles,houston.personals,houston.singles,ne.singles,nv.singles,nyc.singles,pgh.singles,sacramento.singles,sdnet.singles,soc.singles,vegas.singles