Chris Carter, wannabe MP and junk mail cowboy.
BR
here, I had been receiving about 10 times as much junk mail as I used
to when I lived in my old place. As a result I have put a sign on my
letterbox which reads "No Junk Mail. Penalty for Infringement: $100."
Since the sign was displayed, The volume of unsolicited mail has been
reduced to a trickle. I have telephoned every offender since the sign
was in place, and in every case, received a verbal apology from the
people concerned, along with an assurance that it would not happen
again. Of course, none of the transgressors considered their leaflets
to be junk mail. However, I have not threatened anyone with court
action since an apology has been forthcoming in every case.
Until today.
On Monday the 2nd of November, I received a leaflet from a Chris
Carter, informing me of local boundary changes, the fact that he was
aiming to become my new MP, and a host of other political promises and
slagging off at the government. I telephoned Mr Carter, and informed
him that someone in his employ had delivered one of his electioneering
handbills to my letterbox, and explained the situation regarding the
sign. However, instead of apologising, Mr Carter expressed his
annoyance at being phoned at home. I found this attitude to be rather
odd, since his home address and phone number were on the leaflet. I
then asked him to instruct his employee not to put any more handbills
in my letterbox. He told me that he delivered the pamphlet himself,
spouted the standard "I don't consider the leaflet to be junk mail",
and then said that he would be delivering two more handbills
containing more of this type of material whether I liked it or not. I
told him that in that case, I would be taking him to court for the
$100 infringement penalty, and pointed out to him that someone had
already successfully sued a telemarketing company for an identical sum
of money for wasting their time. (not exactly the same thing of
course. However, in a legal sense it may turn out to be not that
different either) He did not seem to be listening to me, because he
just said: "Did the National Party bother to keep you informed about
the new electoral boundaries?" I replied that I did not need a
representative from any political party to supply me with information
that is already public knowledge, and that perhaps the National Party
has more respect for private property than he has. At this stage Mr
Carter became somewhat flustered, and babbled on non-stop about how I
would look silly if tried to sue him. He then abruptly said: "This
conversation is over" and put the phone down.
Here is the name and address that appears on this leaflet. The fact
that it is there means that it is public domain.
Chris Carter.
6 Sunrise Lane, Te Atatu South.
Phone: 834 9020 Mobile: 025 461 658
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~radiodoc
ICQ: 3314536
David
Ask for the lawyer of the succesful person who sued the telemarketing
company and see if the lawyer is willing to take up your case.
I'm sure it would make wonderful headlines on the radio in the morning and
get great coverage at parliment.
I look forward to hearing it on the news.
David
dwil...@globe.co.nz
PS Great idea of having the sign on the letterbox. I will have to try it
myself and see the response.
Jerry
BR wrote in message <36421cdd...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...
The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
you can go to federal prison.
Dave Lloyd
wrote:
>The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>you can go to federal prison.
And the USA is supposed to be the land of free enterprise?
I often have notices to give to people in my neighbourhood, and
I walk around and put them in their letterboxes myself.
It's free, faster than NZ post, and guaranteed to get to the right
letterbox.
John Paul
wrote:
>
>The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>you can go to federal prison.
>
monopolistic outfit to do anything. Thank God the old Post Office was
shaken up and opened up to competition. These days cheery whistling
couriers in shorts pick up and deliver at lightening speed. NZ Post
are slower with my mail these days. Used to arrive mid morning,
nowadays it arrives 1-2:00pm, sometimes later. The posties are grumpy
sods, too. They've never been happy since NZ Post took away their
whistles and put them in crash hats.
Sometimes NZ Post deliver as much junk as the independents. Should NZ
Post decide what is and what is not junk? Should NZ Post refuse
revenue earning junk delivery jobs? Should NZ Post become our
protectors and letter box censors?
Lin Nah
Lloyd) wrote:
>On Wed, 4 Nov 1998 23:03:34 +1300, "Jerry" <sto...@ihug.co.nospam.nz>
>wrote:
>
>>The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>>you can go to federal prison.
Yes I was amazed last week when I read about this in rec.food.cooking
It was a thread about tipping at restaurants that went to talk about
tipping other things.
It seems if you subscribe newspapers, the paper boy/girl can't deliver
it to your mailbox in the US. Hence the scenes in tv/movies of them
cycling and tossing things all over the place. This lady only tips
her paper person if s/he delivers it right at the door rather than a
vague aim at the door.
regards
Lin
Peter Belt at the PLUG
<REM...@POSTMASTER.com> wrote:
>David
>dwil...@globe.co.nz
>PS Great idea of having the sign on the letterbox. I will have to try it
>myself and see the response.
I have a sign that says "Please, not circulars or junk
mail". The only thing I got recently that wasn't delivered
by NZPost was Grapevine, and I can understand why they would
have problems thinking of their mag as junk <<grin>>
My point: No need to get aggressive - IMHO.
Peter Belt at the PLUG
>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>you can go to federal prison.
Great. So how do you send a note to the rest of the street
when puddy hasn't come home for a day or two and may be
stuck in someone's garage?
Why oh why do 'we' want to legislate what should be done by
good parenting in the first place... <rhetorical>
Lin Nah
>In article <71p8q6$cpi$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, "Jerry"
><sto...@ihug.co.nospam.nz> wrote:
>
>> The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>> your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>> send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>> someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>> you can go to federal prison.
>
>All junk mail that NZ Post puts in our Post Office box (this is a major
>money-spinner for them of course) makes the short trip, each day, to the
>fastpost mailbox a mere 2.5m from our post box.
You can actually op out of this.
Go to the service counter and ask them how.
once you op you they should not put it in your box again
Lin
TarlaStar
>On Wed, 4 Nov 1998 23:03:34 +1300, "Jerry" <sto...@ihug.co.nospam.nz>
>wrote:
>
>>The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>>you can go to federal prison.
>
>And the USA is supposed to be the land of free enterprise?
>I often have notices to give to people in my neighbourhood, and
>I walk around and put them in their letterboxes myself.
>It's free, faster than NZ post, and guaranteed to get to the right
>letterbox.
You can drop flyers off and stick them in a door, or under a
windshield wiper, but you cannot put anything in the mail box which
doesn't go through the postal service.
*****
"Oh this age! How tasteless and ill bred it is."--Catullus
*****
M Johnson
> On Monday the 2nd of November, I received a leaflet from a Chris
> Carter, informing me of local boundary changes, the fact that he was
> aiming to become my new MP, and a host of other political promises and
> slagging off at the government. I telephoned Mr Carter, and informed
> him that someone in his employ had delivered one of his electioneering
> handbills to my letterbox, and explained the situation regarding the
> sign.
ROTFL! Good on you, and keep us informed of the battle.
FYI, Chris Carter was a Labour MP from 1993 to 1996, but lost his seat at
the 1996 election. He has since continued to live at the public trough,
however, as the "electoral agent" for the list MP Jonathan Hunt.
Next time you speak to Chris, ask him if the leaflets were drafted on the
taxpayer-funded computer in his taxpayer-funded office and whether the
were printed on the taxpayer-funded photocopier in same office. For good
measure, ask whether he delivered them during the eight hours a day
taxpayers pay him to attend to the needs of his non-existent constituents
(list MPs have no constituents) or whether he did it in his own time.
M Johnson
I didn't view him as getting aggressive. I thought it sounded a real
scream. Chris Carter must have thought he was caught up in a Monty Python
script.
rob
<sto...@ihug.co.nospam.nz> wrote:
> The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
> your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
> send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
> someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
> you can go to federal prison.
All junk mail that NZ Post puts in our Post Office box (this is a major
money-spinner for them of course) makes the short trip, each day, to the
fastpost mailbox a mere 2.5m from our post box.
Kinda like, recycling, as I see it.
rob
-
puf...@ihug.co.nzz
remove one 'z' from the email address before replying
rob
PLUG) wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 1998 22:51:37 +1300, "David"
> <REM...@POSTMASTER.com> wrote:
>
> >David
> >dwil...@globe.co.nz
> >PS Great idea of having the sign on the letterbox. I will have to try it
> >myself and see the response.
>
> I have a sign that says "Please, not circulars or junk
> mail". The only thing I got recently that wasn't delivered
> by NZPost was Grapevine, and I can understand why they would
> have problems thinking of their mag as junk <<grin>>
>
> My point: No need to get aggressive - IMHO.
My thought exactly!
Jerry
Peter Belt at the PLUG wrote in message <3641a545...@news.ww.co.nz>...
>>The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have
to
>>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>>you can go to federal prison.
>
>when puddy hasn't come home for a day or two and may be
>stuck in someone's garage?
>
>Why oh why do 'we' want to legislate what should be done by
>good parenting in the first place... <rhetorical>
>
friend or neighbour of course. Commercial or in the case of this post
campaign material would draw a complaint, and probably result in
prosecution. Some companies put material in little plastic bags which they
can hang on the front doorknob.
One thing that annoys me is the inability of people delivering free
newspapers to get them all the way in the mailbox. With 6 centimetres
sticking out in the rain it makes a very good wick to soak all your mail.
Jerry
Amy Gale
> It seems if you subscribe newspapers, the paper boy/girl can't deliver
> it to your mailbox in the US. Hence the scenes in tv/movies of them
> cycling and tossing things all over the place. This lady only tips
> her paper person if s/he delivers it right at the door rather than a
> vague aim at the door.
Yeah. A friend in the US is an (ahem) Avon Lady[1], and instead of
leaving a catalogue in the letterbox if the occupants don't answer the
door, she has to put them in a plastic bag and hang it over the
doorknob.
I just remembered that when I was 12 I had a friend who delivered
Contact[2], and she had been told that it had to go in the letterbox
proper because the round newspaper receptacle was Only For The Evening
Post. Can anyone confirm?
Amy
[1] To support her own Avon habit.
[2] Free weekly Wellington community newspaper.
Scott A Higham
Peter Belt at the PLUG wrote:
> I have a sign that says "Please, not circulars or junk
> mail". The only thing I got recently that wasn't delivered
> by NZPost was Grapevine, and I can understand why they would
> have problems thinking of their mag as junk <<grin>>
>
> My point: No need to get aggressive - IMHO.
We have a sign on our letterbox saying 'No Evangelists', but that doesn't
stop us from getting the infamous 'Grapevine' magazine.
Scott Higham.
Scott A Higham
Amy Gale wrote:
> l....@auckland.ac.nz (Lin Nah) writes:
>
> > It seems if you subscribe newspapers, the paper boy/girl can't deliver
> > it to your mailbox in the US. Hence the scenes in tv/movies of them
> > cycling and tossing things all over the place. This lady only tips
> > her paper person if s/he delivers it right at the door rather than a
> > vague aim at the door.
>
> Yeah. A friend in the US is an (ahem) Avon Lady[1], and instead of
> leaving a catalogue in the letterbox if the occupants don't answer the
> door, she has to put them in a plastic bag and hang it over the
> doorknob.
Don't get me started on the Avon lady!!
The one in our area delivers the catalogue, with a little note saying 'I
only have x number of copies of this catalogue, so could you leave your
orders with the catalogue in the letterbox and I will collect it on
Saturday. Alternatively, if you do not wish to place an order, kindly leave
the catalogue in the letterbox for me to collect'.
What a nerve!
And, of course I threw it away. And the woman promptly knocked on the door
at 9.00am on a Saturday asking for her catalogue back. Needless to say, I
had to make up an excuse saying that I had never received it. I don't think
she believed me, and obviously guessed it had been thrown away. She got
really upset, and started to tell me how much it costs to print, and that
her 'agent' would not be happy!
I basically told her she could take her flamin' Avon catalogue, and kindly
insert it into her rectum and rotate!
Since then, we have not received our complimentary Avon catalogue!
Scott Higham.
Scott A Higham
TarlaStar wrote:
> You can drop flyers off and stick them in a door, or under a
> windshield wiper, but you cannot put anything in the mail box which
> doesn't go through the postal service.
I'd like to see anybody successfully be able to enforce that meaningless law.
Scott Higham.
rob
> On Thu, 05 Nov 1998 08:37:26 +1300, nob...@spam.com (rob) wrote:
>
> >In article <71p8q6$cpi$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, "Jerry"
> ><sto...@ihug.co.nospam.nz> wrote:
> >
> >> The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
> >> your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you
have to
> >> send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
> >> someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
> >> you can go to federal prison.
> >
> >All junk mail that NZ Post puts in our Post Office box (this is a major
> >money-spinner for them of course) makes the short trip, each day, to the
> >fastpost mailbox a mere 2.5m from our post box.
> You can actually op out of this.
> Go to the service counter and ask them how.
> once you op you they should not put it in your box again
>
> Lin
I asked them about this.
Their reply was that they either put it in every box, or no boxes at all,
and just because I didn't want it doesn't mean that others don't.
So they get it back.
I kinda like having something to put in the posting box every day anyway!
spaceghosts
<snip>
> Here is the name and address that appears on this leaflet. The fact
> that it is there means that it is public domain.
> Chris Carter.
> 6 Sunrise Lane, Te Atatu South.
> Phone: 834 9020 Mobile: 025 461 658
> http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~radiodoc
Can you prove this phone call and his words [as you stated
them here]? I sure hope so. ;-)
Ashley Campbell
Scott A Higham wrote in message
>Don't get me started on the Avon lady!!
>
>The one in our area delivers the catalogue, with a little note saying 'I
>only have x number of copies of this catalogue, so could you leave your
>orders with the catalogue in the letterbox and I will collect it on
>Saturday. Alternatively, if you do not wish to place an order, kindly
leave
>the catalogue in the letterbox for me to collect'.
>
>What a nerve!
>
>And, of course I threw it away.
You mean to say, Scott, you didn't even bother looking to see if they had
some moisturiser that suited?
What a missed opportunity ;-)
Scott A Higham
Ashley Campbell wrote:
> You mean to say, Scott, you didn't even bother looking to see if they had
> some moisturiser that suited?
>
> What a missed opportunity ;-)
I buy the No Frills stuff at Countdown, and am not about to spend bloody
twenty bucks on 20ml of posh crap that comes in some fancy container!
Scott Higham.
BR
wrote:
Would you would vote for a jerk like that?
If you want proof, why don't you telephone him yourself, pose as a
constituent, and complain about the shite that he has put in your
letterbox? That way you can appraise the situation for yourself.
That's not very hard, is it?
Bill.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~radiodoc
ICQ: 3314536
Lin Nah
>In article <3640dc9c...@news.auckland.ac.nz>, l....@auckland.ac.nz wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Nov 1998 08:37:26 +1300, nob...@spam.com (rob) wrote:
>> >All junk mail that NZ Post puts in our Post Office box (this is a major
>> >money-spinner for them of course) makes the short trip, each day, to the
>> >fastpost mailbox a mere 2.5m from our post box.
>> You can actually op out of this.
>> Go to the service counter and ask them how.
>> once you op you they should not put it in your box again
>I asked them about this.
>Their reply was that they either put it in every box, or no boxes at all,
>and just because I didn't want it doesn't mean that others don't.
Utter BS.
From what I gather, they can put a colour sticker (one of those round
things that is coloured) to indicate that this box doesn't want junk
mail. If you remember filling out the box application form they asked
you for a demography so they can target these things
Ask someone else and another one till someone comes up with the right
answer.
Alternatively the modus operandi may have changed lately
lin
ps which PO is this?
TarlaStar
>>The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
>>your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
>>send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
>>someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
>>you can go to federal prison.
>
>Great. So how do you send a note to the rest of the street
>when puddy hasn't come home for a day or two and may be
>stuck in someone's garage?
You stick a poster up on a lamppost saying "Lost Puddy," or you put a
note in everyone's door. Not even UPS or Federal Express are allowed
to place stuff in the mailbox. They deliver to the door.
TarlaStar
Well, if the postal carrier finds stuff in the box that's not supposed
to be there, they take it to the Postmaster and they WILL prosecute.
Geoff McCaughan
>
> The USA has a good law about this - the only people that can put mail in
> your mailbox is the Post Office. If you want to mail something, you have to
> send it through the post office. It's a federal crime to put material in
> someone's mail box (You are defrauding the US Postal Service). Do it and
> you can go to federal prison.
Yeah, so you just get US post delivering junkmail. Big improvement.
Peter Belt at the PLUG
I added one of those 'look before you open the door' lens
peep-hole thingies to my front door years ago. It's been
effective against 99% of religious visitors, and 100% of
child slavery workers trying to sell me tasteless candy at
highly inflated prices.
It has also proven it's worth during the curse of the
imported Halloween evening.
I realise I must sound like a scrooge, but when you're door
is run down by people on an almost daily basis for your
money and/or your spirit while you're trying to just keep
life within your own budget, and your precious time with
your own family and friends, the high frequency of it got me
beyond caring about how *they* might feel.
Peter Belt at the PLUG
<scott....@national.org.nz> wrote:
>Don't get me started on the Avon lady!!
>
>The one in our area delivers the catalogue, with a little note saying 'I
>only have x number of copies of this catalogue, so could you leave your
>orders with the catalogue in the letterbox and I will collect it on
I throw mine out. I have yet to be called to task on it
(keeping in mind that I might not open the door!), but I
would tell her to real the THREE signs explaining my wish
not to receive such material.
I tell you what, from now on until the end of the year, the
volume of paper that hits the letter box is incredible. I
challenge someone to keep it in a pile and weigh it during
January, then multiply it by the number of households in
your city/town to get a total weight of paper waste.
It's out of control. --- one positive thing: almost all
circular distributors respect the 'please no ciruclars'
sign.
Peter Belt at the PLUG
>money-spinner for them of course) makes the short trip, each day, to the
>fastpost mailbox a mere 2.5m from our post box.
Good on ya! I've been doing the same for years. First a
rubbish bin appeared. Then a sign pointing out there was a
rubbish bin. Then a sign asking us not to use the mailboxes
as rubbish bins. The rubbish bin is gone :-) I think we're
winning.
I always thought the postal system accepted misdirected
mail. I don't want it, so "I return it to sender" via the
same mail system that delivered it :-)
Nick
>Well, if the postal carrier finds stuff in the box that's not supposed
>to be there, they take it to the Postmaster and they WILL prosecute.
What right does the carrier have to peer thru someone's mailbox? His job is to
deliver the mail, not police the Post office laws.
Nick
"Responses welcome: Flames ignored"
TarlaStar
At least they have to pay someone to bother you.
*****
One of the best things about outer space is that you can't
smell a dog fart.
*****
TarlaStar
>On Thu, 05 Nov 1998 12:46:12 GMT, bmy...@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
>
>>Well, if the postal carrier finds stuff in the box that's not supposed
>>to be there, they take it to the Postmaster and they WILL prosecute.
>
>What right does the carrier have to peer thru someone's mailbox? His job is to
>deliver the mail, not police the Post office laws.
S/He has to deliver and take away the mail. If there's stuff in there
without a stamp, s/he'll see it. Pretend you're a mail carrier. You go
up to the mailbox and go to put stuff in, but there's already stuff in
there. So you pull it out to check to see if it's outgoing mail and lo
and behold! You have a flyer from some company that's been stuffed
illegally into the mailbox. So you just take it back to the post
office and hand it over to the boss. That's part of your job.
Mailboxes have to conform to certain measurements and are for the
exclusive use of the U.S Postal Service.
Enkidu
>
>volume of paper that hits the letter box is incredible. I
>challenge someone to keep it in a pile and weigh it during
>January, then multiply it by the number of households in
>your city/town to get a total weight of paper waste.
>
turns waste paper into logs of wood (assuming you have
a wood burner). The waste paper that I do burn at the
mo' though not in log form burns with some pretty colours.
Cliff
Scott A Higham
Peter Belt at the PLUG wrote:
> I tell you what, from now on until the end of the year, the
> volume of paper that hits the letter box is incredible. I
> challenge someone to keep it in a pile and weigh it during
> January, then multiply it by the number of households in
> your city/town to get a total weight of paper waste.
>
> It's out of control. --- one positive thing: almost all
> circular distributors respect the 'please no ciruclars'
> sign.
Some guy in Lower Hutt collects it, and I remember seeing a picture in the
paper of his collection. It almost filled an entire room.
Scott Higham.
Gareth Renowden
l....@auckland.ac.nz (Lin Nah) wrote:
>If you remember filling out the box application form they asked
>you for a demography so they can target these things
>
>Ask someone else and another one till someone comes up with the right
>answer.
When we moved in to Limestone Hills, we had to sign a rural delivery
contract, and were given the opportunity to decline junk mail. We
didn't, because the local freesheets make excellent free firelighting
material - much better than the endless Warehouse catalogues, which
really don't burn very well at all (notice the blueish flame because
of all the ink?).
Gareth Renowden, Limestone Hills, New Zealand
Words, magazines and truffles
Office +64 (0)3 351 9803 Home +64 (0)3 314 9921
"Don't you go where the huskies go. Don't you eat that yellow snow."
(FZ)
Snoopy
wrote:
>
>One thing that annoys me is the inability of people delivering free
>newspapers to get them all the way in the mailbox. With 6 centimetres
>sticking out in the rain it makes a very good wick to soak all your mail.
>
box with a spring loaded hinged front door and no slot. Now the
newspaper deliverer has to physically pull open the door and shove the
paper completely inside. SNOOPY
-----------------------------------------------------
Message posted by SNOOPY using 'Forte'
Free Agent V1.11/32- http://www.forteinc.com
------------------------------------------------
janice
Scott A Higham wrote in message <364209E7...@national.org.nz>...
I heard a story like that, this man had to be rescued by the fire
department in the end because he couldnt get out of his room, for the
mountains of paper. ....;)
>
>Scott Higham.
>
janice
Nick wrote in message <364208f1...@news.spectranet.ca>...
>On Thu, 05 Nov 1998 12:46:12 GMT, bmy...@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
>
>>Well, if the postal carrier finds stuff in the box that's not supposed
>>to be there, they take it to the Postmaster and they WILL prosecute.
>
>What right does the carrier have to peer thru someone's mailbox? His job
is to
>deliver the mail, not police the Post office laws.
LOL....
janice
>
labou...@my-dejanews.com
SrPaAdMi...@ihug.co.nz (BR) wrote:
> I have recently moved to a new area. In the short time I have lived
> here, I had been receiving about 10 times as much junk mail as I used
> to when I lived in my old place. As a result I have put a sign on my
> letterbox which reads "No Junk Mail. Penalty for Infringement: $100."
> Since the sign was displayed, The volume of unsolicited mail has been
> reduced to a trickle. I have telephoned every offender since the sign
> was in place, and in every case, received a verbal apology from the
> people concerned, along with an assurance that it would not happen
> again. Of course, none of the transgressors considered their leaflets
> to be junk mail. However, I have not threatened anyone with court
> action since an apology has been forthcoming in every case.
>
> Until today.
>
> On Monday the 2nd of November, I received a leaflet from a Chris
> Carter, informing me of local boundary changes, the fact that he was
> aiming to become my new MP, and a host of other political promises and
> slagging off at the government. I telephoned Mr Carter, and informed
> him that someone in his employ had delivered one of his electioneering
> handbills to my letterbox, and explained the situation regarding the
> sign. However, instead of apologising, Mr Carter expressed his
> annoyance at being phoned at home. I found this attitude to be rather
> odd, since his home address and phone number were on the leaflet. I
> then asked him to instruct his employee not to put any more handbills
> in my letterbox. He told me that he delivered the pamphlet himself,
> spouted the standard "I don't consider the leaflet to be junk mail",
> and then said that he would be delivering two more handbills
> containing more of this type of material whether I liked it or not. I
> told him that in that case, I would be taking him to court for the
> $100 infringement penalty, and pointed out to him that someone had
> already successfully sued a telemarketing company for an identical sum
> of money for wasting their time. (not exactly the same thing of
> course. However, in a legal sense it may turn out to be not that
> different either) He did not seem to be listening to me, because he
> just said: "Did the National Party bother to keep you informed about
> the new electoral boundaries?" I replied that I did not need a
> representative from any political party to supply me with information
> that is already public knowledge, and that perhaps the National Party
> has more respect for private property than he has. At this stage Mr
> Carter became somewhat flustered, and babbled on non-stop about how I
> would look silly if tried to sue him. He then abruptly said: "This
> conversation is over" and put the phone down.
>
Regarding your message in the Newsgroups ....
Factual comments
Some responses to the silly comments from a "supposed" constituent of mine
with a obsession about junk mail were both factually incorrect and clearly
politically motivated. To bother phoning someone up over such a silly and
trivial matter as putting a leaflet in a letter box shows a serious lack of
either a life or motives that are clearly poltical.
What was interesting was the name that the caller gave me on the phone is not
currently
listed on the latest electoral roll. What a surprise! I wonder what political
party he and M
Johnson ( another commentator on this matter)are supporting in the coming
election. I
would wager Labour is not that party!
The 22,000 leaflets I have just distributed in my new electorate boundaries
were all funded by our local Labour Party. This is clearly stated on the
pamphlet - a Labour publication which is paid for by party members.. You
might note that the "outraged" local claimed he had received no other
political material in his letterbox. That at least was true!. It should also
come as no surprise since none of my political opponents have bothered to
send out anything locally. Indeed the local National Party MP has already
announced he will not be running in the new electorate. I guess that
indicates the obvious - that National has given up on the seat and I am the
only one out there doing the work!.
Cheap political shots are pathetic and a waste of space on the net. I hope
any readers who have bothered to read the pathatic rubbish about my role as "
a pamphlet cowboy" will realise that an election is probably close. I suppose
my political opponents must be getting desperate if they are resorting to mad
phone calls and silly comments on radio and the net.
Chris Carter
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
labou...@my-dejanews.com
M Johnson <joh...@NOSPAMthepub.co.nz> wrote:
> BR wrote:
>
> > On Monday the 2nd of November, I received a leaflet from a Chris
> > Carter, informing me of local boundary changes, the fact that he was
> > aiming to become my new MP, and a host of other political promises and
> > slagging off at the government. I telephoned Mr Carter, and informed
> > him that someone in his employ had delivered one of his electioneering
> > handbills to my letterbox, and explained the situation regarding the
> > sign.
>
>
> FYI, Chris Carter was a Labour MP from 1993 to 1996, but lost his seat at
Factual comments
Chris Carter
> the 1996 election. He has since continued to live at the public trough,
> however, as the "electoral agent" for the list MP Jonathan Hunt.
>
> Next time you speak to Chris, ask him if the leaflets were drafted on the
> taxpayer-funded computer in his taxpayer-funded office and whether the
> were printed on the taxpayer-funded photocopier in same office. For good
> measure, ask whether he delivered them during the eight hours a day
> taxpayers pay him to attend to the needs of his non-existent constituents
> (list MPs have no constituents) or whether he did it in his own time.
Brian Harmer
>In article <36421cdd...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>,
> SrPaAdMi...@ihug.co.nz (BR) wrote:
>>"No Junk Mail. Penalty for Infringement: $100."
>To bother phoning someone up over such a silly and
>trivial matter as putting a leaflet in a letter box shows a serious lack of
>either a life or motives that are clearly poltical.
Bluster aside, if you did indeed deliver the pamphlets yourself, which
part of "no junk mail" is hard to understand?
--
Brian Harmer
http://www.vuw.ac.nz/~bharmer/
I may not be disgruntled but I am far from gruntled
P G Wodehouse
Enkidu
Peter Metcalfe
On Fri, 6 Nov 1998, Enkidu wrote:
> Oh god, who's the joker?
Chris Carter apparently. I wonder if this appearance means that DBF
will put him in the nz.politics FAQ?
--Peter Metcalfe
spaceghosts
> >Can you prove this phone call and his words [as you stated
> >them here]?
> Why?
Well if I'm to form an opinion about this perhaps I should
know the facts. When someone claims something it doesn't
mean it is necessarily true.
BR
>Regarding your message in the Newsgroups ....
>
>Factual comments
>
>Some responses to the silly comments from a "supposed" constituent of mine
>with a obsession about junk mail were both factually incorrect and clearly
>politically motivated. To bother phoning someone up over such a silly and
>trivial matter as putting a leaflet in a letter box shows a serious lack of
>either a life or motives that are clearly poltical.
Mr Carter, you are missing the point. This dispute is not about
politics. It is about you coming to my home, and disobeying a written
request not to put junk mail in my letterbox. You were not the only
one to do so, nor were you the only one to receive a telephone call
from me. You were, however, the only one who argued the point. You
were the only one who, instead of offering an apology, promised that
two more such leaflets would be delivered personally by you to my
letterbox, regardless of the fact that I have asked you not to. I can
only conclude that it is to be done with the express purpose of
causing me as much annoyance as possible. Why do you think you can
take such a belligerent attitude towards someone, and then claim that
the resulting public rebuke was purely political in intent?
>What was interesting was the name that the caller gave me on the phone is not
>currently
>listed on the latest electoral roll.
I am not on the electoral roll in your electorate. I have only lived
in this electorate for just over a month. The post you are replying to
started with: "I have recently moved to a new area". You would do well
to read your correspondence a little more carefully in future.
>What a surprise! I wonder what political
>party he and M
>Johnson ( another commentator on this matter)are supporting in the coming
>election. I
>would wager Labour is not that party!
Unlike the electoral boundary arrangements, the party or MP who I, or
anyone else votes for, is not a matter for public record. However, I
will say this: I will not be voting for you. How can someone like you
be trusted to carry out the wishes of a large number of people, when
you steadfastly refuse to comply with a simple written request not to
intefere with private property?
>The 22,000 leaflets I have just distributed in my new electorate boundaries
>were all funded by our local Labour Party. This is clearly stated on the
>pamphlet - a Labour publication which is paid for by party members..
>You might note that the "outraged" local claimed he had received no other
>political material in his letterbox. That at least was true!. It should also come
>as no surprise since none of my political opponents have bothered to send
>out anything locally. Indeed the local National Party MP has already
>announced he will not be running in the new electorate. I guess that indicates
>the obvious - that National has given up on the seat and I am the only one out
>there doing the work!.
>Cheap political shots are pathetic and a waste of space on the net.
What is the above speech, if it is not a "cheap political shot"? What
you are saying here is that it is OK to litter someones private
property with unsolicited material, despite a written request not to
do so, when the purpose of that material is to further your own
political agenda, but it is not OK for the owner of the private
property to deliver a public rebuttal on the internet, the latter
being labelled by you as, "pathetic and a waste fo space on the net".
That is pure hypocricy, Mr Carter.
>I hope
>any readers who have bothered to read the pathatic rubbish about my role as "
>a pamphlet cowboy" will realise that an election is probably close.
You might have a better chance of succeeding in politics if you could
refrain from throwing your rattle out of the pram until after you have
won a seat in parliament, Mr Carter.
>I suppose
>my political opponents must be getting desperate if they are resorting to mad
>phone calls and silly comments on radio and the net.
You can suppose all you like. I am not, have never been, nor ever will
be, affiliated to any political party. I defy you to find any evidence
to the contrary.
Avatar
On Fri, 06 Nov 1998 04:16:09 GMT, labou...@my-dejanews.com wrote in
message [<71tt69$5p9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>]:
>Regarding your message in the Newsgroups ....
The established protocol when replying to a message is to delete all quoted
text that is not immediately relevant to the comments you make in order to
aid readability. As it was, I skipped your message initially as I assumed
you were just another know-nothing newbie with time to waste.
It also costs money.
>Some responses to the silly comments from a "supposed" constituent of mine
>with a obsession about junk mail were both factually incorrect and clearly
Your admission that your flyer is, indeed, junk mail renders the rest of
your argument superfluous. He claims to have had a 'no junk mail' notice on
his mail box. The fact that your representatives ignored this, and that you
abuse him for your own rudeness, clearly demonstrates that YOU are a
typical slippery politician.
>politically motivated. To bother phoning someone up over such a silly and
>trivial matter as putting a leaflet in a letter box shows a serious lack of
>either a life or motives that are clearly poltical.
It shows nothing of the sort. It is his right to complain to a
'representative of the people', and it is your job to listen. And if it is
over junk-mail, you listen and do something about the junk mail problem.
Who in the hell do you think you are ? Sitting there with delusions of
grandeur, dismissing the little person's problems as 'trivial' and 'silly'
? Absolving yourself of any and all blame, in the effort that your
incompetence is not exposed ?
>What was interesting was the name that the caller gave me on the phone is not
>currently listed on the latest electoral roll.
He clearly stated he has only recently moved into the electorate.
>What a surprise!
There is no surprise in my mind; 'Yes, Minister' is a documentary.
>I wonder what political party he and M Johnson ( another commentator on this
>matter)are supporting in the coming election. I would wager Labour is not that
>party!
Oh goody: a Conspiracy Theory!
The issue is about your blatant disregard for the wishes of your
constituents. If you cannot even cater to the 'silly, trivial' wishes of
your constituents, how can any of them be sure you will be up to the task
if it is something actually tricky ? E.g. non-trivial ?
By your own admission, it seems obvious that even a trivial problem is
beyond your powers. Perhaps you think that once you are in, and on the
'gravy train', you'll be 'untouchable' for three years ? Pay off the house,
get that car... a few trips overseas on 'important government business',
etc. ? Better than Lotto!
>The 22,000 leaflets I have just distributed in my new electorate boundaries
>were all funded by our local Labour Party. This is clearly stated on the
>pamphlet - a Labour publication which is paid for by party members..
So: more evidence to support the 'pamphlet' as being junk mail. It was not
publically funded.
>You
>might note that the "outraged" local claimed he had received no other
>political material in his letterbox. That at least was true!. It should also
>come as no surprise since none of my political opponents have bothered to
>send out anything locally.
The people want Deeds, not propaganda.
>Indeed the local National Party MP has already
>announced he will not be running in the new electorate. I guess that
>indicates the obvious - that National has given up on the seat and I am the
>only one out there doing the work!.
And so the fall of Rome started...
>Cheap political shots are pathetic and a waste of space on the net.
You would be New then...
>I hope
>any readers who have bothered to read the pathatic rubbish about my role as "
>a pamphlet cowboy" will realise that an election is probably close.
Pure genius.
Just as a baby knows only that it must eat and sleep, so a politician knows
he must only get elected and spout rot.
>I suppose
>my political opponents must be getting desperate if they are resorting to mad
>phone calls and silly comments on radio and the net.
The radio as well now ? Oh boy - you ARE unpopular. Probably your 'up
yours' attitude.
>Chris Carter
I'm 12 shades of impressed Chris Carter, Labour candidate. Really I am.
My advice (sage-like as it is): Make your apologies, stop delivering your
junk to people who 'just say no', and then make sure everyone knows how you
listen to the people.
No doubt, you will instead persist in your arrogance.
Avatar
--
Let your rapidity be that of the wind, your compactness that of the forest.
In raiding and plundering be like fire, is immovability like a mountain.
Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall
like a thunderbolt. - Sun Tzu's "Art of War".
Join the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email - http://www.cauce.org
All my comments are "In my Opinion", unless otherwise stated.
M Johnson
> > SrPaAdMi...@ihug.co.nz (BR) wrote:
> >>"No Junk Mail. Penalty for Infringement: $100."
>
> >trivial matter as putting a leaflet in a letter box shows a serious lack of
> >either a life or motives that are clearly poltical.
>
> part of "no junk mail" is hard to understand?
>
Wasn't it a whinging whining crock of bull? My estimation of Mr Carter
went down enormously. If he can't stand the heat, he shouldn't be trying
so hard to get back into the kitchen.
Enkidu
>
>Wasn't it a whinging whining crock of bull? My
>estimation of Mr Carter went down enormously. If he
>can't stand the heat, he shouldn't be trying so hard to
>get back into the kitchen.
That's if it were genuine. Too many people round here
know how to masquerade as someone else, for good
reasons or bad. Is it a con, right from the original post
which came from an anonymous source, I believe,
through to a fake post from Chris Carter? Just to make
him look bad. I don't know the man myself.
Cliff
Geoff McCaughan
>
> On Fri, 06 Nov 1998 04:16:09 GMT, labou...@my-dejanews.com wrote in
> message [<71tt69$5p9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>]:
>
>
> text that is not immediately relevant to the comments you make in order to
> aid readability. As it was, I skipped your message initially as I assumed
> you were just another know-nothing newbie with time to waste.
I think your initial reaction was right on the money.
Avatar
On Sat, 7 Nov 1998 09:54:45 +1300, "Enkidu" <Cliff...@vuw.ac.nz> wrote
in message [<91038588...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>]:
>That's if it were genuine. Too many people round here
>know how to masquerade as someone else, for good
>reasons or bad. Is it a con, right from the original post
>which came from an anonymous source, I believe,
>through to a fake post from Chris Carter? Just to make
>him look bad. I don't know the man myself.
Talk about paranoia..
It must have been me, eh Cliff ? After all, according to you, I am just
about everyone else here...
chris 'fufas' grace
DPF wrote in message <3649d79f...@news.ihug.co.nz>...
>
>Incidentally I hope it won't be too far off that having MPs post here
>won't be of any particular note, as it will be common place.
>
If you mean 'here' as in 'nz.general', where I'm reading this,
you need your head read.
Keep the losers in nz.politics where they belong, or start a new
group "nz.politicians.mps.losers" where they can post and we can all ignore
them.
Enkidu
>
>Talk about paranoia..
>
>It must have been me, eh Cliff ? After all, according
>to you, I am just about everyone else here...
>
and you grab the bait and swallow it.
For what it's worth, I didn't think it was you. The style
(or lack of it, really) was not A>V>A>T>A>R.
Cliff
BR
The email copy I received at home came from labou...@xtra.co.nz
>Regarding your message in the Newsgroups ....
>
>Factual comments
>
>Some responses to the silly comments from a "supposed" constituent of mine
>with a obsession about junk mail were both factually incorrect and clearly
>politically motivated. To bother phoning someone up over such a silly and
>trivial matter as putting a leaflet in a letter box shows a serious lack of
>either a life or motives that are clearly poltical.
Mr Carter, you are missing the point. This dispute is not about
politics. It is about you coming to my home, and disobeying a written
request not to put junk mail in my letterbox. You were not the only
one to do so, nor were you the only one to receive a telephone call
from me. You were, however, the only one who argued the point. You
were the only one who, instead of offering an apology, promised that
two more such leaflets would be delivered personally by you to my
letterbox, regardless of the fact that I have asked you not to. I can
only conclude that it is to be done with the express purpose of
causing me as much annoyance as possible. Why do you think you can
take such a belligerent attitude towards someone, and then claim that
the resulting public rebuke was purely political in intent?
>What was interesting was the name that the caller gave me on the phone is not
>currently
>listed on the latest electoral roll.
I am not on the electoral roll in your electorate. I have only lived
in this electorate for just over a month. The post you are replying to
started with: "I have recently moved to a new area". You would do well
to read your correspondence a little more carefully in future.
>What a surprise! I wonder what political
>party he and M
>Johnson ( another commentator on this matter)are supporting in the coming
>election. I
>would wager Labour is not that party!
Unlike the electoral boundary arrangements, the party or MP who I, or
anyone else votes for, is not a matter for public record. However, I
will say this: I will not be voting for you. How can someone like you
be trusted to carry out the wishes of a large number of people, when
you steadfastly refuse to comply with a simple written request not to
intefere with private property?
>The 22,000 leaflets I have just distributed in my new electorate boundaries
>were all funded by our local Labour Party. This is clearly stated on the
>pamphlet - a Labour publication which is paid for by party members..
>You might note that the "outraged" local claimed he had received no other
>political material in his letterbox. That at least was true!. It should also come
>as no surprise since none of my political opponents have bothered to send
>out anything locally. Indeed the local National Party MP has already
>announced he will not be running in the new electorate. I guess that indicates
>the obvious - that National has given up on the seat and I am the only one out
>there doing the work!.
>Cheap political shots are pathetic and a waste of space on the net.
What is the above speech, if it is not a "cheap political shot"? What
you are saying here is that it is OK to litter someones private
property with unsolicited material, despite a written request not to
do so, when the purpose of that material is to further your own
political agenda, but it is not OK for the owner of the private
property to deliver a public rebuttal on the internet, the latter
being labelled by you as, "pathetic and a waste fo space on the net".
That is pure hypocricy, Mr Carter.
>I hope
>any readers who have bothered to read the pathatic rubbish about my role as "
>a pamphlet cowboy" will realise that an election is probably close.
You might have a better chance of succeeding in politics if you could
refrain from throwing your rattle out of the pram until after you have
won a seat in parliament, Mr Carter.
>I suppose
>my political opponents must be getting desperate if they are resorting to mad
>phone calls and silly comments on radio and the net.
You can suppose all you like. I am not, have never been, nor ever will
M Johnson
> My advice (sage-like as it is): Make your apologies, stop delivering your
> junk to people who 'just say no', and then make sure everyone knows how you
> listen to the people.
Christ, Avatar, that was one of the best-aimed missives I've seen round
here. I really mean that. I shall view you in quite a different light
from now on.
M Johnson
>
> M Johnson wrote
> >
> >Wasn't it a whinging whining crock of bull? My
> >estimation of Mr Carter went down enormously. If he
> >can't stand the heat, he shouldn't be trying so hard to
> >get back into the kitchen.
>
> know how to masquerade as someone else, for good
> reasons or bad. Is it a con, right from the original post
> which came from an anonymous source, I believe,
> through to a fake post from Chris Carter? Just to make
> him look bad. I don't know the man myself.
No, it was genuine. He actually emailed me from Jonathan Hunt's Xtra
account with the same post. Chris is Jonathan's "electorate" agent.
Interesting how he's posted here via Deja News when he could have done it
much quicker and more simply via Xtra.
Avatar
On 7 Nov 1998 00:40:30 GMT, geo...@trimble.co.nz (Geoff McCaughan) wrote in
message [<7204tu$ot7$1...@ukko.trimble.co.nz>]:
>Avatar (n...@spam.spammers) wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 06 Nov 1998 04:16:09 GMT, labou...@my-dejanews.com wrote in
>> message [<71tt69$5p9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>]:
>>
>> >Regarding your message in the Newsgroups ....
>>
>> The established protocol when replying to a message is to delete all quoted
>> text that is not immediately relevant to the comments you make in order to
>> aid readability. As it was, I skipped your message initially as I assumed
>> you were just another know-nothing newbie with time to waste.
>
>I think your initial reaction was right on the money.
heh - you are probably exactly right. I'm always getting myself into
pointless arguments ;)
Avatar
On Sat, 07 Nov 1998 20:11:22 +1200, M Johnson <joh...@NOSPAMthepub.co.nz>
wrote in message [<364400...@NOSPAMthepub.co.nz>]:
I assure you, it was entirely by mistake ;)