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

Airbnb removed my negative review

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 473 posts

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#361

Post by mynameisvlad »

admax88qqq wrote: post #352
mynameisvlad wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the same person, and the question still applies. If you're so pedantic, then, > Since when is a social media account required to leave reviews? It's just as absurd when written this way. But, please, show me the exact place where Airbnb (or any other big company) says that a social media presence is required to leave a review. I'm waiting.

Show me where Airbnb promises to accept every review? I'm waiting. Edit: furthermore spam prevention takes all sorts of random signals in to account. Having no online presence other than a single stay in Airbnb certainly looks suspicious. Nobody writes their spam detection algorithm as policy.

What indication do you have that such a policy is even remotely in use at Airbnb or another company?

Nobody writes their spam detection algorithm as policy, but there is also no evidence whatsoever that social media presence was in any way shape or form used to make the decision here. Airbnb at no point mentioned it, nor would it have been something that crossed your mind if original commenter didn't mention it as a fact about themselves.

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#362

Post by [deleted] »

wyclif wrote: post #326
seattle_spring wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but I literally laughed out loud after reading your comment.

Laugh away, but Old Twitter was run by some pretty scummy people who allowed the FBI and CIA to backdoor the service. It was also a lot slower and broken compared to how fast it is now, especially outside North America (they recently added a lot more server capacity). Also massively bloated as recently as a year ago. Loads of people working there who didn't seem to do much except tweak icons 2000 times, enforce DEI m…

[deleted]

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#363

Post by ocdtrekkie »

techsupporter wrote: post #312
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false. The first condominium in the continental US was built in 1960, the entire scheme is only 63 years old. There's some older buildings that have been converted, sure, but the legal concept isn't that old. And buildings start needing more significant structural work after forty or fifty years. Which is to say, yes, I expect many more condos to collapse over the next couple decades.

> The first condominium in the continental US was built in 1960, the entire scheme is only 63 years old. This is correct in the sense that it is technically correct (for residential dwellings; commercial condominiums have existed for almost a hundred years prior). However, residential cooperatives (co-ops) have existed in the United States since the mid-1800s. These are functionally the same as a condominium with a s…

I mean, FWIW, the issue primarily relates solely with residential dwellings: Businesses generally have a better grasp on risk factors. Also, many residential cooperatives, to my knowledge, refer largely to house-sized structures, especially... in the mid-1800s. It's much more affordable to manage repairs for less floors and traditional wood frame construction.

It's also plausible the legal structure of a condominium itself is the problem that leads to, well, largely incompetent management.

Obviously I'm not sure landlords are a winning solution for anyone either. But particularly for large structures, I would prefer actual public/government management over a quasi-government entity comprised of self-centered residents.

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#364

Post by jeroenhd »

welshwelsh wrote: post #217
jeroenhd wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This analysis about the impact Airbnb was having on Amsterdam disagrees: https://www.ing.nl/zakelijk/kennis-over-de-economie/onze-eco... The city has passed laws to keep down the amount of temporary rentals so the balance has undoubtably shifted by now. A later analysis by the same bank ( https://bnb-beheer.nl/blog/2019/03/06/prijseffect-airbnb-op-... ) says as much.

Ok, so ban AirBnB and more housing is available for people who want long term leases... but there's still a problem, because now we have a shortage of temporary housing. Any solution that isn't "build a fuckton more housing units" isn't a solution at all. We need enough housing for permanent residents AND people who prefer to live in AirBnBs. Often the AirBnB people are wealthy tourists who spend a lot and stimulate…

Obviously the solution is "build a million extra houses". However, it turns out building a million houses takes time. Until the houses are built, get rid of the temporary housing meant almost exclusively for tourists this particular city doesn't want, everybody wins.

"Rich tourists" are good for purely tourist driven economies, but most cities don't exist to please the whims of tourists, and most local businesses in a wealthy economy aren't targeting rich tourists either.

What actually happens is that family neighbourhoods are forced to deal with constant parties and drunk and loud tourists because some multimillionaire set up one of the rare available houses for his personal profit.

I'm sure there are people who enjoy living in AirBnB's but that's not what AirBnB is even trying to accomplish. Hotels exist and are regulated for good reason. Tourists are put in touristy areas where businesses want to attract tourists, also for good reason.

When dealing with a housing shortage, the local population is more important than tourists, unless there is no economy other than the tourist economy. Look at what happened to Venice, the city that exclusively exists because of tourists because of overtourism.

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#365

Post by mhuffman »

mijamo wrote: post #360
mhuffman wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>they have no online history making it hard to distinguish them from a bot or puppet. Implying that a "bot" or "puppet" is paying to stay at AirBnB's just so they can write salty reviews?

Yes this is exactly what they do, and what happens with many Amazon items as well, and for Booking.com It is not really a big cost because you only really need to pay the platform fee (you control both sides of the transaction do the only real cost is the middleman). Reviews are super important and it is hard to get booking when you have 0 reviews so it is not surprising that some hosts would spend some dollars for 3…

Except you are describing the opposite of what is being done. Not positive reviews, but negative reviews. I can certainly see astroturfing your own properties with great reviews, but negative ones? That is a situation where you do not control both sides of the transaction, so a high price to pay to put a "fake" negative review on a property!

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#366

Post by admax88qqq »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #361
admax88qqq wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me where Airbnb promises to accept every review? I'm waiting. Edit: furthermore spam prevention takes all sorts of random signals in to account. Having no online presence other than a single stay in Airbnb certainly looks suspicious. Nobody writes their spam detection algorithm as policy.

What indication do you have that such a policy is even remotely in use at Airbnb or another company? Nobody writes their spam detection algorithm as policy, but there is also no evidence whatsoever that social media presence was in any way shape or form used to make the decision here. Airbnb at no point mentioned it, nor would it have been something that crossed your mind if original commenter didn't mention it as a…

Maybe we're aggresively agreeing with eachother?

I'm not arguing that Airbnb does use presence/lack of social to make a decision here. I just objected to you saying

> Since when is a social media account required to do online business?

I interpreted that as you being outraged that Airbnb requires some form of social presence to do business. I felt you were exaggerating and responded by saying its just about the review. I meant that even _if_ Airbnb is checking this, it's not a big deal cause this is just one of many signals that could feed into spam detection and we're only talking about the _review_ not the ability to use Airbnb at all.

You raised a valid point earlier, I doubt they're actually checking this, my point is just that even if they are, who cares. OP looks suspicious by having no online presence at all and only one stay on Airbnb. That combined with the language in their review probably tipped the spam filters to say "hey it's probably safer if we don't let this review through, doesn't seem legit"

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#367

Post by ocdtrekkie »

ajhurliman wrote: post #335
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My takeaway from dealing with a condo HOA is that condos shouldn't legally exist, because people owning fractional buildings is doomed to result in structural collapse. Elected residents aren't qualified to make decisions about long-term maintenance which becomes more severe and expensive over time, and they have perverse incentives to avoid spending money. Faced with a substantial enough cost, board members can opt…

Technically a condo owner has fee simple (i.e. absolute) ownership of the airspace in their unit and tenancy in common (i.e. shared) with the other owners for the walls, floors and common areas. I guess what you're arguing here is that groups of people shouldn't be able to own real property collectively, which would undermine a lot of the legal infrastructure that underpins business and society today; not just condos…

The idea I can own my airspace, but be entirely dependent on some other idiots with no qualifications to make key decisions that determine if the floor, walls, and ceiling continue to remain stable and surrounding my property is problematic. Surfside will not be the last large condo to collapse this decade.

The legal structure makes some sense but the accountability is a joke. Structural safety should be handled at a more reputable level.

Also the definitions between your property and the common elements is... unclear in many cases, at best, and somewhat predatory in design at worst.

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#368

Post by admax88qqq »

mhuffman wrote: post #365
mijamo wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes this is exactly what they do, and what happens with many Amazon items as well, and for Booking.com It is not really a big cost because you only really need to pay the platform fee (you control both sides of the transaction do the only real cost is the middleman). Reviews are super important and it is hard to get booking when you have 0 reviews so it is not surprising that some hosts would spend some dollars for 3…

Except you are describing the opposite of what is being done. Not positive reviews, but negative reviews. I can certainly see astroturfing your own properties with great reviews, but negative ones? That is a situation where you do not control both sides of the transaction, so a high price to pay to put a "fake" negative review on a property!

Read the top comment that started this thread. It was about a positive review.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34219765

> Airbnb removed my positive review and accused me of being in cahoots with the host to leave positive feedback.

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#369

Post by nicce »

vertis wrote: post #154

I'm part of the problem not part of the solution and I know it. I spend almost all of my time in AirBnBs and other short term accommodation and I will rarely if ever leave a negative review. This is for several reasons. Firstly I stay in the places much longer than the average guest, so notice flaws more than someone that is there for a whirlwind visit. Some things are taste based as well. But also because I understa…

> But also because I understand that often it's a small business and by leaving negative reviews I'm fucking with someones livelihood (this varies from place to place and I'm far more likely to leave a review if it's company owned).

There used to be a time, when people used AirBnB to get some extra money when they did not need their apartment. Not to earn their living. That was one good reason why AirBnB was successful in the beginning.

Now people are making business with the help of AirBnB. And it has brought nothing good. The price of living increases for locals and they can’t own their home. Those small businesses which can afford multiple apartments so that part can be in AirBnB 24/7, do not have problems on making the living. They just want to get richer by doing nothing.

At least here in north Europe, you need hundreds of thousands of investments in euros before you can make your living, and assuming you have loans. If you don’t have, then your living does not depend on it.

Re: Airbnb removed my negative review

#370

Post by JacobThreeThree »

ornornor wrote: post #271
prepend wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve never had to pay a cleaning fee?

These are so egregious and can be 50% of a night cost. I’ve had so many bad experiences with Airbnb. It’s never like in the pictures. It’s always noisier, low quality mattress and furniture that looks good on pictures but isn’t functional or breaks if you touch it. I also feel like I’m living in ikea showrooms around the world. And given how expensive the cleaning is, it’s rarely passably clean. Moldy corners in the…

>It’s hotels for me every time as well.

I like to search for newly built hotels as they usually offer the nicest accommodations.

Post reply on HN