That's all well and good, but what we really need is some good ol' fashioned boycotting of these offending companies. And, perhaps a class-action lawsuit or two. At least once per month, I have contacted Dell computers to again ask them to stop sending me their huge (glossy, 4-color) computer catalog each month, which I have never ordered...not even once. Promise after promise by customer service reps and managers broken. For being careless, clueless tree robbers, I will never buy a Dell nor recommend that others do.

Why would you think boycotting will stop advertising mailers? It will probably cause more, since people are not buying that must mean more advertising must be done.

Fine. As long as it is in a non-intrusive, eco-friendly way. I can turn off my television if I do not want to see an ad. But, clearly, I cannot turn off the postal service...god knows that I've tried. (Anti-junk mail lists are a joke.)

Stopjunkmail.org is another site that points you in the right direction in a do-it-yourself fashion. They even give templates to help and recommend not even using envelopes.

You shuold, in fact, be able to stop the postal service - or more correctly, use the Postal Service's regulations to stop the mailer. From the Utah Atty General's office website:

Have you asked a company to stop sending you advertisements because you find them offensive but the company continues to mail you the advertisements anyway? You have the right to stop these mailings. Federal law 39 U.S.C. 3008 gives you the power to stop offensive material, which is any material you believe to be provocative, from being mailed to you. The Supreme Court said you can declare a “dry goods catalog” to be offensive and prohibit its delivery to your home (Rowan v. United States Post Office Department, 397 U.S. 728 (1970)). The post office must accept whatever you classify as offensive, even if they don’t believe it is sexually oriented.

File a Form 1500, Application for a Prohibitory Order (section one of the form). You can download a free, printable copy of Form 1500, pick one up from your local post office or ask for a copy to be mailed to you by telephoning a major post office in your area. It is a very short, simple form.

You must attach the entire mailing you found offensive with the application. Be sure the offensive mailing is open because the Post Office is not allowed to open your mail.

Take the completed form, “page 2 and the reverse of page 2," back to your post office or mail it to the following address:

PROHIBITORY ORDER PROCESSING CENTER
US POSTAL SERVICE
PO BOX 3744
MEMPHIS TN 38173-0744

Keep “page 3" and the “reverse of page 3" for your file.

You should receive a copy of the Prohibitory Order 30 days after you submit your application, after it has been processed by the Postal Service. Once you receive the Order, it is unlawful for that specific company to continue sending you mail advertisements. If the company sends prohibited material to you, contact your post office and ask them to enforce the order.

[Specifically, the Supreme Court's "Rowan" ruling says this:

"In operative effect the power of the householder under the statute is unlimited; he may prohibit the mailing of a dry goods catalog because he objects to the contents-or indeed the text of the language touting the merchandise. Congress provided this sweeping power not only to protect privacy but to avoid possible constitutional questions that might arise from vesting the power to make any discretionary evaluation of the material in a governmental official. [397 U.S. 728 , 738] In effect, Congress has erected a wall-or more accurately permits a citizen to erect a wall-that no advertiser may penetrate without his acquiescence. The continuing operative effect of a mailing ban once imposed presents no constitutional obstacles; the citizen cannot be put to the burden of determining on repeated occasions whether the offending mailer has altered its material so as to make it acceptable. Nor should the householder have to risk that offensive material come into the hands of his children before it can be stopped.

"We therefore categorically reject the argument that a vendor has a right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another. If this prohibition operates to impede the flow of even valid ideas, the answer is that no one has a right to press even 'good' ideas on an unwilling recipient. That we are often 'captives' outside the sanctuary of the home and subject to objectionable speech and other sound does not mean we must be captives everywhere."]

You don't say for how much my account will be debited. I'm interested in helping but need to know exactly what amount I'm charged on a regular basis.

Serious technical and identity issue questions:

1) You state the following: "This is why GreenDimes is such a dream come true. You sign up, we do the rest..." However, after enrolling, the following email is then sent out: "Fourth, you will be receiving a small packet from us in the next couple of weeks. There are some companies that simply won’t accept 3rd party submissions. So, we will send you pre-paid postcards (on 100% recycled paper, of course) that you will have to sign and mail."

You either should take care of it all as you state or outline the additional steps we have to take prior to enrollment.

Next, prior to enrolling there was NO mention that you would forward my personal information to the DMA (one of the largest direct mail organizations in the country); however, after I enrolled I then received the notification that a $1.00 charge will show up on my credit card for the DMA. Sure enough, I got the $1.00 charge. Does this mean you submitted my personal information to the DMA without my permission? As a matter of fact, you even state for us NOT to submit a request to be deleted from a catalog if we are not receiving it because it will give the catalog company our address. However, it appears you are actually doing the exact thing that you advise us not to do but on a MAJOR scale. Please advise...

The above is all based on information I had dated 12/16/2006.

Hi Greta,

I just read your 9/27/06 comment regarding the Dell catalog mailing list. I work for Dell headquarters in Round Rock, TX and would like to help on your request to remove your name from the mailing list. I would also like to add that Dell shares a similar concern regarding usage of paper and trees.
At Dell, we've built environmental consideration into every stage of our product life cycle -- from development and design, to manufacturing and operations, to customer use and product recovery. Dell continually increases the use of recycled-content paper, as well as paper sources from Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) certified paper, as outlined in our Forest Products Stewardship Model. By 2006, Dell marketing publications were using an average of 50 percent recycled paper content globally. Dell estimates the increased recycled content paper eliminates the use of nearly 35,000 tons of virgin fiber paper per year -- the equivalent of saving more than 250,000 trees. When you get a chance, please visit our website www.dell.com/earth for more information about our environmental initiatives such as our newly launched program called “Plant a Tree for Me”.
Please email me directly if you would like assistance on the mailing list removal request and I would be more than happy to help. Thanks and have a great day!

Best Regards,
Marie
Dell Customer Advocate
Email: Customer_Advocate@dell.com

I think paying a company to make up for our governments inability to create or enforce common sense laws is incredibly inefficient. Even if the model works, it is only a short term solution because the whole process will evolve towards maximizing profits.

Thankfully the green movement is almost over, meaning that it is becoming no longer a trendy movement but a way of life. This concept, of poisoning our air, water, food, etc, etc, in order to create material to get it to someone who won’t look at it, will soon be as ridiculous to most people as it now is to us.

What environmental impact is Greendimes having? They must at least need electricity, among other things, to run their business. Are these the kinds of jobs we want citizens to have? And do we want millions of us to spend our time and money trying, sometimes unsuccessfully, to protect our privacy and health? Wouldn't it be a lot easier to work towards passing more common sense laws? That's a long term solution that seems more practical and should be applied to other areas.

Jack described how one person (one of billions) can get just one company (one of billions) to stop (sometimes only temporarily) sending them stuff. It took me longer to read the explanation than I care to spend executing the instructions. And why should we have to go through all of that?

Although it is practical for the government to pay private companies to perform some services, it is not practical for the government, or any of its citizens, to pay private companies NOT to perform services when a stroke of a pen could do the job. The "stroke of a pen" route does not create unemployment, but instead, it creates opportunities for citizens to pursue more fulfilling careers. The alternative to a pen stroke is to create yet another Profit God Market going in circles churning out more and more poison for our kids to swallow.
-Rico Bergy