←back to thread

631 points xbryanx | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jordanb ◴[] No.44532900[source]
I went on a deep dive on this scandal about a year or so ago. One thing that struck me is the class element.

Basically, the Post Office leadership could not understand why someone would buy a PO franchise. It's a substantial amount of money up front, and people aren't allowed to buy multiple franchises, so every PO was an owner/operator position. Essentially people were "buying a job".

The people in leadership couldn't understand why someone would buy the opportunity to work long hours at a retail position and end up hopefully clearing a middle class salary at the end of the year. They assumed that there must be a real reason why people were signing up and the real reason was to put their hands in the till.

So they ended up assuming the postmasters were stealing, and the purpose of the accounting software was to detect the fraud so it could be prosecuted. When the accounting software started finding vast amounts of missing funds, they ignored questions about the software because it was working as intended. I bet if the opposite had happened, and it found very little fraud, they would have become suspicious of the software because their priors were that the postmasters were a bunch of thieves.

replies(16): >>44532976 #>>44533020 #>>44533158 #>>44533278 #>>44533786 #>>44533975 #>>44534079 #>>44534542 #>>44535515 #>>44535532 #>>44536140 #>>44536170 #>>44536440 #>>44536933 #>>44537531 #>>44540144 #
ionwake ◴[] No.44533278[source]
I found this comment insightful but I feel I must itirate ( maybe its not needed), that it is not "clear" if leadership were ignorant, as you said, ( though Im sure you are part right ), I have read that it was malicious leadership trying to protect their own asses as per another comment.
replies(2): >>44533459 #>>44535306 #
horizion2025 ◴[] No.44535306[source]
What I've seen so far suggest they were just ignorant and victims of confirmational bias etc. You can see that when they won some cases they wrote internally something to the effect of "Final we can put to rest all those concerns about these cases blablabla". So it became self-validating. Also the courts and defense lawyers didn't manage to the see the pattern and in the huge numbers of such cases. Each defendant was fighting their own battle. Also, a mathematician from Fujitsu gave "convincing" testimony they didn't have any errors. A lot was down to lack of understanding of how technology works. The fact that xx millions of transactions were processed without errors doesn't preclude that there could be errors in a small number, as was the case. In this case sometimes coming down to random effects like if race conditions were triggered.
replies(3): >>44536108 #>>44536326 #>>44537054 #
Brian_K_White ◴[] No.44536326[source]
"victims of confirmational bias"

dude

replies(2): >>44537003 #>>44537023 #
1. ◴[] No.44537003{3}[source]