4 ms·

Bribes are generally illegal. This should be "compensates," not "bribes." "Bribes" is just hyperbole. This is standard practice for a lot of businesses in a sim

by jsiegz 10y ago

Bribes are generally illegal. This should be "compensates," not "bribes." "Bribes" is just hyperbole. This is standard practice for a lot of businesses in a similar space.

supercanuck 10y ago
bribe would be accurate since they were offering payment outside their remediation process they setup. Instead of simply offering payment in exchange for the damage per their guarantee, they wanted something in return: Silence.
- twblalock 10y ago
  Asking for confidentiality about the terms of a settlement is common, and there is nothing wrong with it.
  - supercanuck 10y ago
    sure, just like there is nothing "wrong" with calling it a bribe. They wanted something outside of their official process.
    - jpttsn 10y ago
      What if one day the Airbnb exec privately pockets money for getting someone into an apartment? You've already used "bribe;" where do you go from there? The problem with hyperbole is you will pay the inflation tax on your word choice. Crying wolf, basically.
      - supercanuck 10y ago
        I just bribed my kid to do his homework. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bribe https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bribe I am using the word correctly. Perhaps you should consider if you're interpretation of the word is not biased?
        jpttsn 10y ago
        If you feel(touch) you've been clear(see-through) and fair(bright, sunny) with this line of rhetoric, I'm happy to drop the advice.
        NeutronBoy 10y ago
        > you're Frankly, if you want to have an argument over the semantics of language and the interpretation of words, you need to be on top of your writing.
    - twblalock 10y ago
      When you call something a "bribe," you insinuate that something illegal has happened, but that is not the case.
      - supercanuck 10y ago
        You insinuated it to be illegal, I insinuated it to be dishonest.
  - mcguire 10y ago
    So AirBNB requires an NDA for all claims against its host guarantee?
- PeterisP 10y ago
  Bribe would be accurate if they were offering payment outside someone else's remediation process. Apparently payments+NDA are part of the remediation process that they actually set up in practice. There's also no reason to assume why a private remediation process should be universal and the same for everyone, it's not a court - it would be unfair to close down options that they advertised, but it's completely reasonable to offer extra options on a case-by-case basis if they want, even if they weren't included in the advertised remediation process. The only thing that's might be viewed as dishonest is that their statement "The Host Guarantee will reimburse eligible hosts for damages up to $1,000,000." doesn't explicitly mention that certain conditions apply on how the Host Guarantee is implemented; though it does say 'eligible hosts' which quite likely is explained in the full Host Guarantee text as 'hosts that, among other things, agree to an NDA'.
  - supercanuck 10y ago
    If everything is case-by-case and determined by "eligibility," what is the purpose of the word Guarantee here, and funds released are subject to conditions having nothing to do with the actual rental (e.g. an NDA)? Seems to me, using the words "Guarantee", "Trust" "Peace of Mind" is no different than the customer using the term "Bribe". but maybe this is just situation where consumers need law degrees to fully understand what it is they are getting. AirBNB relies on economies of scale, so the remediation process should be the same for everyone since the contract is more than likely the same too, and if it is not, then "Trust", "Guarantee", "Peace of mind" are the wrong words to being used to advertise the service. The core reason Bribe is being used, is because AirBnB was withholding payment for something that they advertised as part of the service and would only release it in exchange for an NDA. That IS dishonest.
    - PeterisP 10y ago
      But they ARE honestly fulfilling the guarantee - the host is able to get the requested damages. Yes, it's not an unconditional, no questions asked compensation, but it's not advertised as such. Terms and conditions apply, just as it's reasonable to expect e.g. paperwork and evidence of damages before funds are released. It would be dishonest if they had included terms or conditions that are unreasonable or difficult to fulfil, but an NDA isn't such a condition; it doesn't disqualify anyone who wants to finalize the dispute. Just as it would be very reasonable if the release of funds was conditional on an agreement not to sue for further damages, i.e., that the guarantee happens only if it's agreed to be the final resolution of this matter. The described events don't seem to violate any promise that was actually advertised, the only mismatch is between reality and wishful thinking.
dang 10y ago
We put quotes around that word in the title. I'll add an explanation here in a bit. Edit: ok, here's an explanation. We put quotes around "bribes" because that's the tiniest intervention I can think of that still addresses your concern. Why so tiny? That takes a while to explain, so read on if you want to understand how we approach this. The title breaks the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) by being both baity and misleading. It also contradicts the article text (assuming I read it correctly), since it declares a thing to have happened which the text itself reports as not having happened, if you read it to the end. Such a bait-and-switch is a marker of a bad article. Normally the moderation on this would be a no-brainer. We'd replace the title with one that is accurate and neutral, and we'd apply a standard downweight that we put on outrage stories which don't contain anything of intellectual interest, especially when the topic has appeared many times before. If we didn't do these things, HN's front page would consist of nothing but dime-a-dozen outrage and the elves would leave middle earth. However, when the story is negative about YC or a YC-funded company, the regular rules don't apply; we still moderate, but we do it less. That is the first thing pg taught me about how to moderate HN, and the first thing I've taught every other moderator. I've written about this many times: e.g. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20moderate%20yc%20less https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=... and https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20pg%20chair https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&date.... Frankly, it bites to see an article get away with this kind of thing on HN when we spend every day trying to keep the front page good. But that's the price we pay for being able to answer users' concerns about conflicts of interest in moderating HN. It doesn't prevent a few people from saying awful things about us—this is the internet after all—but it does let us answer in good conscience. Doing our best and answering questions seems to be enough to keep most HN users happy, which is the thing we care most about.
- pvg 10y ago
  At least you're honest about your role in the departure of the Elves from Middle Earth.
- eropple 10y ago

by jsiegz 10y ago

Bribes are generally illegal. This should be "compensates," not "bribes." "Bribes" is just hyperbole. This is standard practice for a lot of businesses in a similar space.

supercanuck 10y ago

bribe would be accurate since they were offering payment outside their remediation process they setup. Instead of simply offering payment in exchange for the damage per their guarantee, they wanted something in return: Silence.

twblalock 10y ago
Asking for confidentiality about the terms of a settlement is common, and there is nothing wrong with it.
- supercanuck 10y ago
  sure, just like there is nothing "wrong" with calling it a bribe. They wanted something outside of their official process.
  - jpttsn 10y ago
    What if one day the Airbnb exec privately pockets money for getting someone into an apartment? You've already used "bribe;" where do you go from there? The problem with hyperbole is you will pay the inflation tax on your word choice. Crying wolf, basically.
    - supercanuck 10y ago
      I just bribed my kid to do his homework. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bribe https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bribe I am using the word correctly. Perhaps you should consider if you're interpretation of the word is not biased?
      - jpttsn 10y ago
        If you feel(touch) you've been clear(see-through) and fair(bright, sunny) with this line of rhetoric, I'm happy to drop the advice.
      - NeutronBoy 10y ago
        > you're Frankly, if you want to have an argument over the semantics of language and the interpretation of words, you need to be on top of your writing.
  - twblalock 10y ago
    When you call something a "bribe," you insinuate that something illegal has happened, but that is not the case.
    - supercanuck 10y ago
      You insinuated it to be illegal, I insinuated it to be dishonest.
- mcguire 10y ago
  So AirBNB requires an NDA for all claims against its host guarantee?
PeterisP 10y ago
Bribe would be accurate if they were offering payment outside someone else's remediation process. Apparently payments+NDA are part of the remediation process that they actually set up in practice. There's also no reason to assume why a private remediation process should be universal and the same for everyone, it's not a court - it would be unfair to close down options that they advertised, but it's completely reasonable to offer extra options on a case-by-case basis if they want, even if they weren't included in the advertised remediation process. The only thing that's might be viewed as dishonest is that their statement "The Host Guarantee will reimburse eligible hosts for damages up to $1,000,000." doesn't explicitly mention that certain conditions apply on how the Host Guarantee is implemented; though it does say 'eligible hosts' which quite likely is explained in the full Host Guarantee text as 'hosts that, among other things, agree to an NDA'.
- supercanuck 10y ago
  If everything is case-by-case and determined by "eligibility," what is the purpose of the word Guarantee here, and funds released are subject to conditions having nothing to do with the actual rental (e.g. an NDA)? Seems to me, using the words "Guarantee", "Trust" "Peace of Mind" is no different than the customer using the term "Bribe". but maybe this is just situation where consumers need law degrees to fully understand what it is they are getting. AirBNB relies on economies of scale, so the remediation process should be the same for everyone since the contract is more than likely the same too, and if it is not, then "Trust", "Guarantee", "Peace of mind" are the wrong words to being used to advertise the service. The core reason Bribe is being used, is because AirBnB was withholding payment for something that they advertised as part of the service and would only release it in exchange for an NDA. That IS dishonest.
  - PeterisP 10y ago
    But they ARE honestly fulfilling the guarantee - the host is able to get the requested damages. Yes, it's not an unconditional, no questions asked compensation, but it's not advertised as such. Terms and conditions apply, just as it's reasonable to expect e.g. paperwork and evidence of damages before funds are released. It would be dishonest if they had included terms or conditions that are unreasonable or difficult to fulfil, but an NDA isn't such a condition; it doesn't disqualify anyone who wants to finalize the dispute. Just as it would be very reasonable if the release of funds was conditional on an agreement not to sue for further damages, i.e., that the guarantee happens only if it's agreed to be the final resolution of this matter. The described events don't seem to violate any promise that was actually advertised, the only mismatch is between reality and wishful thinking.

dang 10y ago

We put quotes around that word in the title. I'll add an explanation here in a bit. Edit: ok, here's an explanation. We put quotes around "bribes" because that's the tiniest intervention I can think of that still addresses your concern. Why so tiny? That takes a while to explain, so read on if you want to understand how we approach this. The title breaks the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) by being both baity and misleading. It also contradicts the article text (assuming I read it correctly), since it declares a thing to have happened which the text itself reports as not having happened, if you read it to the end. Such a bait-and-switch is a marker of a bad article. Normally the moderation on this would be a no-brainer. We'd replace the title with one that is accurate and neutral, and we'd apply a standard downweight that we put on outrage stories which don't contain anything of intellectual interest, especially when the topic has appeared many times before. If we didn't do these things, HN's front page would consist of nothing but dime-a-dozen outrage and the elves would leave middle earth. However, when the story is negative about YC or a YC-funded company, the regular rules don't apply; we still moderate, but we do it less. That is the first thing pg taught me about how to moderate HN, and the first thing I've taught every other moderator. I've written about this many times: e.g. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20moderate%20yc%20less https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=... and https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment&query=by:dang%20pg%20chair https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&date.... Frankly, it bites to see an article get away with this kind of thing on HN when we spend every day trying to keep the front page good. But that's the price we pay for being able to answer users' concerns about conflicts of interest in moderating HN. It doesn't prevent a few people from saying awful things about us—this is the internet after all—but it does let us answer in good conscience. Doing our best and answering questions seems to be enough to keep most HN users happy, which is the thing we care most about.

pvg 10y ago
At least you're honest about your role in the departure of the Elves from Middle Earth.
eropple 10y ago