Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

pagesix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 249 posts

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#71

Post by danielweber »

hawkharris wrote: post #54
danielweber wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, posting reviews of a service you've never used because of something you read on the Internet five minutes ago is not OK.

You misinterpreted my comment. Yes, it would be unacceptable to lie and say that we've all visited the hotel, but that's not what I'm advocating. I specifically said "based on the revelation that none of the other reviews are trustworthy." This isn't simply based on an article I've read. It's a public policy posted by the hotel. I'm suggesting that people comment on a public policy. No more, no less.

Your words: "Our immediate response should be to post negative reviews based on the revelation that none of the other reviews are trustworthy."

You don't know anything about the quality of their online reviews. No, I mean it, you really don't: 5 minutes wasn't enough time for you to investigate this policy and see how long it's been in place. Perhaps this policy is brand new and hasn't affected any online reviews yet, which means "none of their other reviews are trustworthy" would be incorrect. [1] Yet you implore that we should have an "immediate response." Quick, before we have a chance to think this through!!!

There's nothing our primate lizard brains love better than collectively kicking the crap out of an enemy who can't fight back. That isn't something to be celebrated or encouraged.

Slow down, take a deep breath, and count to 10.

[1] Doing this research now doesn't excuse a call for an "immediate response."

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#72

Post by cookiecaper »

owksley wrote: post #17
rrrx3 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should be stating the obvious here, but the fact that I even have to post this means that obviously, I am not. Just because something is written into the terms of an agreement doesn't make it legal.

I think they know it's illegal / unconstitutional. They're banking on self-censorship by people who aren't certain where they stand legally.

...How is this "unconstitutional"? Not everything that is illegal is unconstitutional. I am also skeptical that this is illegal, but considering the jurisdiction may have many applicable laws, it's hard to say that it is or isn't illegal without significant research. But surely it has nothing to do with constitutional law.

Similar pieces of other contracts are valid and common and are called "non-disparagement clauses". I don't see how this differs.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#73

Post by danielweber »

lotsofmangos wrote: post #67
jebus989 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you are not. Say someone writes a contract saying that they can slap me in the face and each time they do I must pay $100, if I carefully read and then sign that contract, and they then slap me three times — have I been assaulted or do I owe $300, or both?

Boxing and other martial activities require you to contractually remove yourself from claiming you have been assaulted as long as any violence stays within agreed rules. It would be very hard to train people in boxing, if your customers could sue you for assault every time you hit them.

Context matters. Participation in a sport generally brings with it an expectation to receive minor injuries customary to that sport.

A legal contract depends on mutual understanding. People learning to box generally understand they are going to get hit. People booking a wedding party generally don't expect to be held responsible for their guests having opinions they post online. The hotel would have to make this policy very clear in order to achieve mutual understanding, and that doesn't mean just putting it on the contract and the webpage for the customer to find on their own.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#74

Post by cookiecaper »

ebbv wrote: post #7
baddox wrote: post #3

If the hotel is clear about these terms, then I don't see much of a problem with this. It makes it really easy to know to pick a different hotel.

Doesn't matter where they claim this fee is legitimate, if the person refuses to pay (which I would), there's no way this would be upheld in civil court.

On what grounds would it be dismissed from a civil court? Similar clauses are in many contracts. I'm just curious if there's a reason to believe this is illegal other than simple unpopularity.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#75

Post by baddox »

nmjohn wrote: post #56
baddox wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not extorting if they are clear about these terms before you decide to book the hotel.

Yet it is. When you attend a wedding, you have absolutely no say in the venue. Yes, the bride and groom may have agreed to the terms, but the attendees did not have a choice. So if they get shitty service and want to post a review about it online, they find out doing so will cost the bride and groom $500. It might not be clear cut extortion - but it is not an acceptable business practice.

The attendees did not have a choice on the venue, but they are not bound to any contract and do not get fined if they post reviews.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#76

Post by baddox »

danielweber wrote: post #73
lotsofmangos wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boxing and other martial activities require you to contractually remove yourself from claiming you have been assaulted as long as any violence stays within agreed rules. It would be very hard to train people in boxing, if your customers could sue you for assault every time you hit them.

Context matters. Participation in a sport generally brings with it an expectation to receive minor injuries customary to that sport. A legal contract depends on mutual understanding. People learning to box generally understand they are going to get hit. People booking a wedding party generally don't expect to be held responsible for their guests having opinions they post online. The hotel would have to make this poli…

> Participation in a sport generally brings with it an expectation to receive minor injuries customary to that sport.

Participation in a contract that specifically covers terms for being slapped also bring with it an expectation of being slapped.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#78

Post by cookiecaper »

Narretz wrote: post #58
easytiger wrote: post #8

Viral business suicide surely.

What about "no such thing as bad publicity"?

That may not hold as true as it used to in a market where many purchasing decisions are informed by the consensus instantly accessible and distilled into a single number from aggregators like Yelp. In such cases, it's crucial that you receive positive indicators from those sources. In the past, angry articles or reports faded had less staying power; they would raise the profile of the business or person by directing discontent for a while, but the discontent would fade and the subject would retain some elevated portion of prominence. These days discontent doesn't fade as easily, since Yelp et al provide it a permanent home.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#79

Post by eli »

zorrb wrote: post #36
dspillett wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for the reasons explained above Being lazy and not reading it myself: do they attempt to adequately explain the policy other than "we'd like to be able to be dickish without getting bad reviews" in "the reasons explained above"? (edit for those only reading this far: it appears that they do, see the replies to this post for detail)

"Please know that despite the fact that wedding couples love Hudson and our Inn, your friends and families may not. This is due to the fact that your guests may not understand what we offer - therefore we expect you to explain that to them. USGH & Hudson are historic. The buildings here are old (but restored). Our bathrooms and kitchens are designed to look old in an artistic "vintage" way. Our furniture is mostly hi…

I actually kinda see where they're coming from. I'm sure they do get complaints from people who never stay anywhere besides upscale chain hotels. But obviously this is not the way to address the issue. It's mean and ultimately self-defeating.
Post reply on HN