4 ms·

He did follow BnB dispute procedure and gave them a chance to overrule the host's unreasonable stance. But BnB conspired with the host to screw him over and sh

by tromp 4y ago

He did follow BnB dispute procedure and gave them a chance to overrule the host's unreasonable stance. But BnB conspired with the host to screw him over and should bear the consequences.

vkou 4y ago
Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. A chargeback is the burn-all-the-bridges, fuck-you-pay-me nuclear option, and you will be banned from any business that you use it against. You should not use it against any business you intend to patronize in the future.
- ghaff 4y ago
  While a possibility given the weird nature of SV companies, it's also pretty much nonsense in general when company support systems break down. It's the sort of learned helplessness that some people promote relative to companies that seems pretty silly. I've certainly used chargebacks when something wasn't working and continued to deal with said companies, albeit rarely. Yes, sometimes you need to break relationships with certain companies as well. But that should be fine in general.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  > Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. I struggle to think that a person should bear literally any consequences if they weren't in the wrong, which AIUI in this case he isn't.
  - vkou 4y ago
    Why do you think a non-monopoly business should be compelled to continue to serve a customer that does chargebacks against it? You can fire that business as a vendor, they can fire you as a customer.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
      For the same reason we protect whistle-blowers; if a person has a reasonable problem with a business, we'd like to avoid the business retaliating because that creates incentives that protect bad actors.

4 ms·

He did follow BnB dispute procedure and gave them a chance to overrule the host's unreasonable stance. But BnB conspired with the host to screw him over and sh

by tromp 4y ago

He did follow BnB dispute procedure and gave them a chance to overrule the host's unreasonable stance. But BnB conspired with the host to screw him over and should bear the consequences.

vkou 4y ago
Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. A chargeback is the burn-all-the-bridges, fuck-you-pay-me nuclear option, and you will be banned from any business that you use it against. You should not use it against any business you intend to patronize in the future.
- ghaff 4y ago
  While a possibility given the weird nature of SV companies, it's also pretty much nonsense in general when company support systems break down. It's the sort of learned helplessness that some people promote relative to companies that seems pretty silly. I've certainly used chargebacks when something wasn't working and continued to deal with said companies, albeit rarely. Yes, sometimes you need to break relationships with certain companies as well. But that should be fine in general.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  > Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. I struggle to think that a person should bear literally any consequences if they weren't in the wrong, which AIUI in this case he isn't.
  - vkou 4y ago
    Why do you think a non-monopoly business should be compelled to continue to serve a customer that does chargebacks against it? You can fire that business as a vendor, they can fire you as a customer.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
      For the same reason we protect whistle-blowers; if a person has a reasonable problem with a business, we'd like to avoid the business retaliating because that creates incentives that protect bad actors.