Consider yourself lucky then. "Dozens of packages" may not have been a large enough sample for the statistics I've seen to pan out. I used to take all those same precautions, and still had issues once in a while.
I think part of the problem is that the postal wokers know you are scamming the system, and they make an extra effort to destroy your package.
I could not disagree more, with either point.
In the first place, this is not luck that I am experiencing. This is the payoff of time spent in careful packaging...very careful packaging. Perhaps you were also careful, and if so, then the damaged packages you experienced are to be taken as a sign of your
bad luck. But it is not good luck if someone goes out of their way to package something securely and it arrives as intended. That's earned success. And if one of my packages arrives damaged, then I will have to consider that I had bad luck...the bad luck of the package entering the hands of a particular employee or employees of the system who treated it with more than an average level of carelessness or, as you suggest, malice.
In the second place, it is ridiculous to suggest that using those envelopes to send tools is "scamming the system." If the USPS advertises that whatever you can fit in the envelope without modifying it and while still using the sticky flap-seal to close the package ships for that flat rate, and someone does just that, then it is by definition impossible to be a "scam" of any kind. Furthermore, none of the packages I have sent has apparently even had a rough ride...no one has reported to me a rip, tear, bullet hole etc. of any kind. So, it does not seem that these irate USPS employees are trying to destroy my packages in an effort to retaliate for my "scam."
What do these envelopes shown in these threads of destruction have in common? No tape, no cardboard sandwich inside the envelope holding the contents securely in place, no padding, in short, no
care of any kind taken by the shipper. That's the common denominator here.
Perhaps dozens of samples are not enough for you to consider the results valid. Perhaps in the next several dozens, I will experience a failure. Even so, my ratio of successful to unsuccessful package deliveries will still be overwhelmingly favorable. But anyway, I consider the sample to be valid. If someone sinks fifty free-throws in a row, do the critics declare the sample too small to determine the presence of skill?
