Re: Postal Charges for using e-mail

From: Allan Harvey (aharvey@boulder.nist.gov)
Date: Wed Mar 22 2000 - 11:46:07 EST

  • Next message: dfsiemensjr@juno.com: "Re: Postal Charges for using e-mail"

    Ack! Like pretty much everything else on the Internet that asks you to
    forward it to all your friends, this is a hoax (and a variant of one that
    has been around for a long time). A quick search found mention of it on
    this Urban Legends reference page:
    http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/pending/internet.htm
    The page talks about 3 versions of the hoax; the one Mr. Stark forwarded is
    down at the bottom. Gullibility and e-mail are a bad combination ...

    At 11:29 AM 3/22/00 -0500, James W Stark wrote:
    >Do we all want to pay for every e-mail we send? Read on.
    >Jim Stark
    >
    ><In a message dated 03/20/00 10:01:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, LucyReeves
    >writes:
    >
    >Subject: US Stamps forE-mails
    >
    > Please read the following carefully if you intend to stay on-line
    >and continue using email: The last few months have revealed an alarming trend
    >in the Government of the United States attempting to quietly push through
    >legislation that will affect your use of the Internet. Under proposed
    >legislation, the U.S. Postal Service will be
    >attempting to bill email users out of "alternate postage fees".
    >
    >Bill 602P will permit the Federal Govt. to charge a 5 cent surcharge on every
    >email delivered by billing Internet Service Providers at source. The
    >consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP. Washington DC lawyer
    >Richard Stepp is working without pay to prevent this legislation from
    >becoming law. The U.S. Postal Service
    >is claiming that lost revenue due to the proliferation of email is costing
    >nearly $230,000,000 in revenue per year.
    >
    >You may have noticed their recent ad campaign "There is nothing like a
    >letter". Since the average citizen received about 10 pieces of email per day
    >in 1998, the cost to the typical individual would be an additional 50 cents
    >per day or over $180 dollars per year, above and beyond their regular
    >Internet costs.
    >
    > NOTE that this would be money paid directly to the U.S. Postal
    >Service for a service they DO NOT EVEN provide. The whole point of the
    >Internet is democracy and noninterference. If the federal government is
    >permitted to tamper with our liberties by adding a surcharge to email, who
    >knows where it will end. You are already paying an exorbitant price for snail
    >mail because of bureaucratic inefficiency. It currently takes up to 6 days
    >for a letter to be delivered from New York to Buffalo. If the U.S. Postal
    >Service is allowed to tinker with email, it will mark the end of the "free"
    >Internet in the US.
    >
    >One congressman, Tony Schnell R has even suggested a "twenty to forty dollar
    >per month surcharge on all Internet service" above and beyond the
    >government's proposed email charges. Note that most of the major newspapers
    >have ignored the story, the only exception being the Washingtonian which
    >called the idea of email surcharge "a useful concept whose time has come"
    >(March 6th 1999 Editorial)
    >
    >Don't sit by and watch your freedom erode away! Send this email to all
    >Americans on your list and tell your friends and relatives and say "No!" to
    >Bill 602P.
    >
    > Kate Turner, Assistant to
    > Richard Stepp, Berger, Stepp and
    > Gorman Attorneys at Law
    > 216 Concorde Street, Vienna, VA>



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 22 2000 - 11:46:25 EST