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

Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

mcmansionhell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 388 posts

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#101

Post by laretluval »

scribu wrote: post #93
uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

I propose an experiement to test the elitism hypothesis: Ask a random selection of people to rate various types of houses. If McMansions are rated poorly only by "elites", then the hypothesis is true. If they're rated poorly by everyone, it's false.

The hypothesis has already been tested: these houses sell very briskly.

Edit: the points below are all fair.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#102

Post by eli »

s73ver wrote: post #50
rdtsc wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the same time a $600M company would be worried about bad publicity at least somewhat. So there are many ways of fighting them. Maybe not a direct "let's see who can outspend who over a lawsuit" but something along the lines of "Are you sure you want your name on Twitter as bullying a fun and popular blogger?" kinda fight.

Not really. Unfortunately, the "bad publicity as a way to keep companies in line" is pretty hit and miss.

If your goal is to send a strong message not to reuse photos, then this isn't even bad publicity.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#104

Post by spamizbad »

laretluval wrote: post #101
scribu wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I propose an experiement to test the elitism hypothesis: Ask a random selection of people to rate various types of houses. If McMansions are rated poorly only by "elites", then the hypothesis is true. If they're rated poorly by everyone, it's false.

The hypothesis has already been tested: these houses sell very briskly. Edit: the points below are all fair.

Depends on the market. They're not so hot in the Chicago suburbs, where buyers have the option of newer construction "modern" homes in addition to pre-WWII vintage homes: https://chicago.curbed.com/2016/9/13/12902744/chicago-mcmans...

There are some metro areas where your only choices are basically McMansions or obsolete post-war housing. Given those limited options, it's no surprise why people prefer them.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#105

Post by r00fus »

Analemma_ wrote: post #5

I kinda figured this was coming sooner or later. McMansion Hell is using unquestionably copyrighted photos, but claims that they fall under Fair Use. I think that's true (but IANAL), but fair use is an affirmative defense that has to hold up in court.

Can we effectively say fair use is dead? I wish mcmansionhell well, but how much is it going to cost them to fight Zillow?

I wonder if EFF would be capable of helping out.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#106

Post by rayiner »

uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

I grew up in Northern Virginia among these McMansions, and frankly I don't buy the elitism angle. These folks have a lot of money (top 5% at least, if not even top 1%) and are among the best educated in the country. And these aren't dwellings driven by the need for functionality. It's not like people here have big families they need to house (empty nesters can afford them more readily than people with families!). They're designed, instead, to be conspicuous consumption. If you can't ridicule them for lacking taste you're basically saying that taste doesn't exist and everything is always subjective.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#107

Post by the_cat_kittles »

chadgeidel wrote: post #91
the_cat_kittles wrote: post #36

is there a kickstarter type platform for legal fees? id be willing to donate some money... (im sure there is)...?

She has a Patreon.

seems like it would work better to scare off intimidation type lawsuits if we could show a willingness to pay her legal fees. then if they fuck off, we dont have to. there must be some kind of legal crowdfunding service like this right?

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#108

Post by spamizbad »

uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

The person you're describing is a 23-year old woman who comes from a working-class background. Hardly elitist. McMansions are/were a status-symbol of the upper-middle class, and now they're being attacked from the bottom.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#109

Post by theptip »

laretluval wrote: post #101
scribu wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I propose an experiement to test the elitism hypothesis: Ask a random selection of people to rate various types of houses. If McMansions are rated poorly only by "elites", then the hypothesis is true. If they're rated poorly by everyone, it's false.

The hypothesis has already been tested: these houses sell very briskly. Edit: the points below are all fair.

Data please. Briskly relative to other houses in the same size / price range?
Post reply on HN