[Frondo]

There are theoretical problems with any system of voting, everything's a trade-off one way or the other. Vote-by-mail increases turnout, it's easier and more convenient, and the problems you're afraid of simply don't happen in practice.

At the end of the day, I'd much rather have the increased participation in the democratic process than cater to the unfounded/theoretical fears of a few folks.

[dingaling]

> the unfounded/theoretical fears of a few folks.

It's not at all theoretical. Postal voting is heavily restricted in Northern Ireland due to past history of paramilitary organisations influencing voter behaviour.

One needs to provide an attested reason for not attending the polling station:

http://www.eoni.org.uk/Vote/Voting-by-post-or-proxy/Voting-b...

You must provide a reason why you cannot reasonably be expected to vote in person at your polling place on polling day. You must provide exact dates and locations (if applicable) or the application may be rejected on the grounds that not enough detail about the reason has been provided.

[Frondo]

Oregon isn't Northern Ireland. They might have had problems with voter coercion. Oregon hasn't. Oregon has had problems with turnout. This improves them.

[zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC]

How do you evaluate risks in general? If it hasn't happened to you, it's unfounded/theoretical, therefore, nothing to worry about?

[Frondo]

The people who've studied the risks of vote-by-mail here have determined that the problems you're afraid of happening don't happen.

I'm not sure why, since this has been studied and an answer has been produced, it would make sense to disregard the studies and answers.

[zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC]

Would you mind pointing me to the actual study that you are referring to?