4 ms·
Why would you ever agree to rent a place where you need to vacate it for 4+ hours every day? The experience with AirBNB sounds all around awful, but I'm honestl
by a2tech 8y ago
Why would you ever agree to rent a place where you need to vacate it for 4+ hours every day? The experience with AirBNB sounds all around awful, but I'm honestly baffled why you would go along with such a weird setup.
- zitterbewegung 8y agoFrom my understanding Airbnb is much cheaper than alternatives . The sharing economy basically functions on that premise and ignore the local laws.
- amorphid 8y agoCheap price?
- huhtenberg 8y agoLow price. Price can't be cheap, because "cheap" already means "available at low price".
- logfromblammo 8y agoIt also means "of low quality", so some disambiguation may be required.
- koolba 8y agoSame reason someone would be willing to rent a pod with barely enough room for a sleeping bag and shared access to a toilet across the street: price That aside banning people for external reviews is nonsense. What’s next, banning someone for speaking (literally talking) about their negative experience?
- ibejoeb 8y agoIsn't "banning" the user in this case simply declining to provide the service? If I were a house painter and, for whatever arbitrary reason, I decide that I don't really like you, I wouldn't paint your house even if you demanded it. I have the right to not engage you. You don't have the right to compel me to engage. As much as Airbnb made this worse that it had to be, I think the flip-side is much worse. Imagine if by some authority one individual was compelled to buy a good from or perform a service for another individual.
- s73v3r_ 8y agoI disagree. This is not AirBnB deciding they just don't like someone. This is AirBnB deciding to ban someone because they gave a negative review. I think the world where you're banned from services for speaking honestly about them is far worse than the alternative. If we can't speak honestly about our experiences, then others simply are not capable of making informed decisions, and all of capitalism goes poof.
- briandear 8y agoIt said “after booking the weekend, we were told we needed to vacate..” So it seems like they didn’t agree to such nonsense. It actually seems that the host ought to be the one kicked off AirBnB for not providing the room being rented for the entirety of the agreed upon dates.
- ibejoeb 8y agoI wouldn't be surprised if it actually did mention this bizarre caveat buried deep in one of the descriptive texts somewhere. I've caught a few gremlins in some listings, like a "whole-place" that is really just a second entrance and private bath, or that time when there was a horde of cats, and it's my responsibility to keep them alive. There a tons of misleading listings. A vacate-type condition really ought to be against the TOS.
- daveFNbuck 8y agoIf you're on vacation, you probably don't need to be in your room between 12 and 4pm anyway. You should be out having lunch and doing tourist things.
- NelsonMinar 8y agoyeah and be sure to only flush the toilet three times a day; you shouldn't need more than that.
- flatline 8y agoWasn't that kind of the point of AirBnB in the beginning? They will facilitate an agreement between two parties for just about any non-conventional arrangement, often even if it flies in the face of local tenancy laws. And that worked great for some odd number of people. The platform has largely been taken over by traditional vacation rentals, and I wonder if this is part of the friction here - atypical cases likely just aren't worth the trouble for AirBnB moving forward.