Try to think of it from the African American plaintiff view and anyone that has a confirmation they would encounter a worse experience for baseless reasons. The

Try to think of it from the African American plaintiff view and anyone that has a confirmation they would encounter a worse experience for baseless reasons. The plaintiffs sued in Oregon, and got a settlement. They only going to travel to Oregon? Many jurisdictions, including the federal government have similar laws. The challenge of the law itself never reached a judicial conclusion, so if AirBnB was willing to settle there, it was either because they thought it was a pretty solid law, or they made a cost benefit analysis to settle. If the latter, then the same is true other places. But instead they are making a harder business decision to resist changing anything, just to spin it as being an ally to marginalized customers. This is a puff piece for a technology that AirBnB could roll out anywhere randomly across any population for the A/B test. Its harder for them to geofence this, harder for them to spin this, as opposed to just doing the normal software rollout strategy. So that’s why. Think about it from the affected plaintiff or customers perspective. Yes, sure, potentially roll it out after this “experiment”. But this is yet another example of why representation matters. This wouldn’t have even gotten greenlit this way if there were more decision makers familiar with this segment of the population by living it.