9 ms·

How does this fit with the linked article, where the lady in question claims her personal liason at the company hadn't even contacted her in a month? How does t

by estel 15y ago

How does this fit with the linked article, where the lady in question claims her personal liason at the company hadn't even contacted her in a month? How does that possibly match up with "doing everything they could be doing to help this woman" when she herself clearly feels ignored? Edit: I'm not accusing the AirBNB guys of being bad guys: I don't know them. But this doesn't seem to address, and seems somewhat contradicted by, the concerns raised by the linked blog.

pg 15y ago
Brian told me that someone from Airbnb called her just a few hours before she published this most recent post.
- dlss 15y ago
  With respect, I don't see how this answers estel's question. Is she crazy? Did she stop checking email, SMS, and phone? (or maybe change number post break in?) Did you misinterpret what the AirBnB guys told you? How can these two drastically different accounts make sense together? (edit: if you only read the TC coverage, the link you are replying to is EJ's account)
  - ellyagg 15y ago
    While I greatly sympathized with her plight originally, I do note that she is somewhat disingenuous in her post today. For example, she quotes AirBnB as saying someone is in custody and then says local officials have not contacted her saying that's the case, implying that this somehow invalidates their claim. But then she goes on to show detailed knowledge of someone being in custody, even though they haven't been charged yet. Next, she quotes AirBnB as saying that they've been in close contact with her, and says that this is false. However, she goes on to write that she has been in regular contact with an AirBnB founder, and talked to another founder, and details some of their conversations. While I still sympathize with her, that doesn't mean she can characterize events any way she pleases and have it be true. I would not be shocked in the least to find that she left out details that would paint AirBnB in a nicer light.
    - dlss 15y ago
      Interesting. I read her post as responses to AirBnB's word twisting in the TC press release -- most of what you call being "disingenuous" is her refuting impressions people might have gotten from the press release and telling her side (instead of just telling her side). Breakdown/example follows: re: suspect in custody. AirBnB was quoted saying "a suspect is now in custody, and our information will now become important evidence" She starts by refuting an impression you might have gotten (the bad guy will go to jail for what he did to her): "no charges or arrest warrant has been issued for my case" (which means AirBnB's information can't be evidence for anything she knows about - she also notes that they might have information that she doesn't) She then describes her case to the best of her knowledge for those interested. re: contact with AirBnB. AirBnB was quoted saying "We have been in close contact with her ever since [5 weeks ago]" She starts by refuting an impression you might have gotten (she has been in contact with AirBnB team members [other than the founder], or had any AirBnB labor tasked full time with helping her) "Since June 30, this co-founder has been the only person at Airbnb from whom I have received occasional contact regarding my situation, his messages directed primarily at my blog post and its activity on Twitter." She then describes her contact with AirBnB in rich, concrete detail for those interested. tl;dr - EJ wasn't being disingenuous/equivocating, she was doing two things with one post (responding to press release and sharing concrete details)
      - ajju 15y ago
        My sympathies are for the victim but I think it would help to post the full context of her statement. She said "One month ago an individual was apprehended, however as far as I know, this person was transferred to a neighboring jurisdiction for prosecution of previous crimes, and no charges or arrest warrant has been issued for my case within San Francisco County." (emphasis mine) I don't think Brian Chesky or AirBNB can have much influence on what crimes the DA prosecutes these perps for. For all we know they committed a more serious crime in the neighboring jurisdiction and so were transferred there. AirBNB could have submitted the evidence they have and the DA might have decided to use it later, or not use it in favor of another case that is stronger.
        15y ago
- Tichy 15y ago
  Doesn't seem to add up with their other claim that they offered to pay for everything from the beginning. Except if they offered it and EJ declined, then she could be paying herself and not be lying.
  - TillE 15y ago
    That'd be a bizarre scenario though, and you'd think at least one of the parties involved would've mentioned it publicly. Instead, we have Chesky saying they've offered nebulous "help", commenting personally on TC. Not mentioning a single step they've taken to actively provide help, no specific offer. What he says in no way conflicts with anything EJ wrote, and the only contradictory information we've had from Airbnb is coming secondhand via pg, posted only on HN. Which is pretty damn weird when you have this kind of situation blowing up on the internet. I like to think that Airbnb wants to do the right thing, but they've made an utterly disastrous mess of communication and PR.
- crag 15y ago
  Who at Airbnb called her? That's like saying to me when I walk into the office; "Someone called you about something." It means nothing. Names. Times. That's the way to handle this. You know, you guys REALLY need good PR people. Number 1 rule of damage control: Make sure everyone involved (on your side) is on the same sheet of music. Number 2 rule: Never lie. Number 3 rule: Give the victim what they want.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

by estel 15y ago

pg 15y ago

Brian told me that someone from Airbnb called her just a few hours before she published this most recent post.

dlss 15y ago
With respect, I don't see how this answers estel's question. Is she crazy? Did she stop checking email, SMS, and phone? (or maybe change number post break in?) Did you misinterpret what the AirBnB guys told you? How can these two drastically different accounts make sense together? (edit: if you only read the TC coverage, the link you are replying to is EJ's account)
- ellyagg 15y ago
  While I greatly sympathized with her plight originally, I do note that she is somewhat disingenuous in her post today. For example, she quotes AirBnB as saying someone is in custody and then says local officials have not contacted her saying that's the case, implying that this somehow invalidates their claim. But then she goes on to show detailed knowledge of someone being in custody, even though they haven't been charged yet. Next, she quotes AirBnB as saying that they've been in close contact with her, and says that this is false. However, she goes on to write that she has been in regular contact with an AirBnB founder, and talked to another founder, and details some of their conversations. While I still sympathize with her, that doesn't mean she can characterize events any way she pleases and have it be true. I would not be shocked in the least to find that she left out details that would paint AirBnB in a nicer light.
  - dlss 15y ago
    Interesting. I read her post as responses to AirBnB's word twisting in the TC press release -- most of what you call being "disingenuous" is her refuting impressions people might have gotten from the press release and telling her side (instead of just telling her side). Breakdown/example follows: re: suspect in custody. AirBnB was quoted saying "a suspect is now in custody, and our information will now become important evidence" She starts by refuting an impression you might have gotten (the bad guy will go to jail for what he did to her): "no charges or arrest warrant has been issued for my case" (which means AirBnB's information can't be evidence for anything she knows about - she also notes that they might have information that she doesn't) She then describes her case to the best of her knowledge for those interested. re: contact with AirBnB. AirBnB was quoted saying "We have been in close contact with her ever since [5 weeks ago]" She starts by refuting an impression you might have gotten (she has been in contact with AirBnB team members [other than the founder], or had any AirBnB labor tasked full time with helping her) "Since June 30, this co-founder has been the only person at Airbnb from whom I have received occasional contact regarding my situation, his messages directed primarily at my blog post and its activity on Twitter." She then describes her contact with AirBnB in rich, concrete detail for those interested. tl;dr - EJ wasn't being disingenuous/equivocating, she was doing two things with one post (responding to press release and sharing concrete details)
    - ajju 15y ago
      My sympathies are for the victim but I think it would help to post the full context of her statement. She said "One month ago an individual was apprehended, however as far as I know, this person was transferred to a neighboring jurisdiction for prosecution of previous crimes, and no charges or arrest warrant has been issued for my case within San Francisco County." (emphasis mine) I don't think Brian Chesky or AirBNB can have much influence on what crimes the DA prosecutes these perps for. For all we know they committed a more serious crime in the neighboring jurisdiction and so were transferred there. AirBNB could have submitted the evidence they have and the DA might have decided to use it later, or not use it in favor of another case that is stronger.
      - 15y ago
Tichy 15y ago
Doesn't seem to add up with their other claim that they offered to pay for everything from the beginning. Except if they offered it and EJ declined, then she could be paying herself and not be lying.
- TillE 15y ago
  That'd be a bizarre scenario though, and you'd think at least one of the parties involved would've mentioned it publicly. Instead, we have Chesky saying they've offered nebulous "help", commenting personally on TC. Not mentioning a single step they've taken to actively provide help, no specific offer. What he says in no way conflicts with anything EJ wrote, and the only contradictory information we've had from Airbnb is coming secondhand via pg, posted only on HN. Which is pretty damn weird when you have this kind of situation blowing up on the internet. I like to think that Airbnb wants to do the right thing, but they've made an utterly disastrous mess of communication and PR.
crag 15y ago
Who at Airbnb called her? That's like saying to me when I walk into the office; "Someone called you about something." It means nothing. Names. Times. That's the way to handle this. You know, you guys REALLY need good PR people. Number 1 rule of damage control: Make sure everyone involved (on your side) is on the same sheet of music. Number 2 rule: Never lie. Number 3 rule: Give the victim what they want.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]