3 ms·
They don't completely ignore it. It is mentioned at least two other times, including in the final paragraph of the article: > USPS declined to provide further
by pyre 13y ago
They don't completely ignore it. It is mentioned at least two other times, including in the final paragraph of the article:
> USPS declined to provide further comment, or respond to these questions, of any kind, despite repeated requests. USPS did not dispute Evan’s recollection of their USPS meeting in DC and did not comment on whether junk mailers are the Post Office’s customers versus average Americans.
- pessimizer 13y agoI mean that they completely ignore discussing the claim on its merits, and just use it without context to paint USPS as a bunch of Luddite rent-seeking goons, as with Uber and taxi laws, or AirBnB and hotel laws.
- XorNot 13y agoIt's become "the silicon valley model" for public policy it seems. Appeal to your audience's sense that they are definitely smarter then everyone else, to try and effect stupid changes in public policy in sectors they (and possibly [the general form of] you) don't really understand. Hell, LightPeak tried to do this with RF Engineering when they wanted permission to obliterate things like satellite SOS communications by using spectrum they knowingly acquired as satellite use only for terrestrial transmissions.