3 ms·

Because the US Post Office couldn't handle even a Christmas rush of cards and packages. One ballot per person per year will absolutely crash that system.

shadowgovt 6y ago
That's the sort of thing that one would assume would create a news cycle, if the USPS failed to handle holiday shipping. Chewing back through the archives of 2019 news, I don't see such a news cycle, or really anyone complaining about extraordinary delays. I do see that the Post Office did an unusual amount of gearing up because the distance between Thanksgiving and Christmas in 2019 shortened the peak shipping window (https://www.marketplace.org/2019/12/05/six-fewer-shipping-days-till-christmas-puts-pressure-on-ups-fedex-and-usps/ https://www.marketplace.org/2019/12/05/six-fewer-shipping-da...). But they appear to have handled it fine. Here's their self-reported tracking metrics through 2019 Q4 on package delivery (https://about.usps.com/what/performance/service-performance/fy2020-q1-package-services-quarterly-performance.html https://about.usps.com/what/performance/service-performance/...). No real deviation from their regular numbers indicating a performance drop. What's our source on the notion that they got crushed by Christmas rush?
- Fjolsvith 6y ago
  It was sarcasm. My point being if they can handle the Christmas rush, they can handle an extra ballot per person once a year. However, I suspect that the "USPS needs funding" narrative was stoked so congress would provide funds to make sure the blockchain voting system the USPS is implementing runs smooth.
  - ncmncm 6y ago
    Sarcasm is against the HN CoC. We have yet to see whether, in its damaged condition, it could still handle the Christmas rush. With sorting machines unplugged and shipped off to warehouses or scrapped, with employees forbidden overtime to handle fluctuations, with hiring frozen, it is far from certain it can still handle votes. That is by design.
    - Fjolsvith 6y ago
      Sorry, I forgot the "/s" at the end.

shadowgovt 6y ago

That's the sort of thing that one would assume would create a news cycle, if the USPS failed to handle holiday shipping. Chewing back through the archives of 2019 news, I don't see such a news cycle, or really anyone complaining about extraordinary delays. I do see that the Post Office did an unusual amount of gearing up because the distance between Thanksgiving and Christmas in 2019 shortened the peak shipping window (https://www.marketplace.org/2019/12/05/six-fewer-shipping-days-till-christmas-puts-pressure-on-ups-fedex-and-usps/ https://www.marketplace.org/2019/12/05/six-fewer-shipping-da...). But they appear to have handled it fine. Here's their self-reported tracking metrics through 2019 Q4 on package delivery (https://about.usps.com/what/performance/service-performance/fy2020-q1-package-services-quarterly-performance.html https://about.usps.com/what/performance/service-performance/...). No real deviation from their regular numbers indicating a performance drop. What's our source on the notion that they got crushed by Christmas rush?

Fjolsvith 6y ago
It was sarcasm. My point being if they can handle the Christmas rush, they can handle an extra ballot per person once a year. However, I suspect that the "USPS needs funding" narrative was stoked so congress would provide funds to make sure the blockchain voting system the USPS is implementing runs smooth.
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Sarcasm is against the HN CoC. We have yet to see whether, in its damaged condition, it could still handle the Christmas rush. With sorting machines unplugged and shipped off to warehouses or scrapped, with employees forbidden overtime to handle fluctuations, with hiring frozen, it is far from certain it can still handle votes. That is by design.
  - Fjolsvith 6y ago
    Sorry, I forgot the "/s" at the end.