There are parties with hundreds of kids on the roof, weed smoked in the hall outside our apartment, a broken front door that can only be closed by smashing as hard as possible or not at all, stains all over the carpet outside the Airbnb, people breaking into our house because they're drunk, people buzzing every apartment because they've locked themselves out and it's 4AM. The place is a 365 day Airbnb, which is illegal, and Airbnb know that too and don't care.
AirBnB refuse to take any responsibility, even just to raise issues with the person running the BnB. They have even repeatedly said they can't find a listing by address - seriously, not that the address is wrong, but they they simply do not have the capability. We can't speak to the neighbor because they don't live there, they just rent out their apartment on Airbnb. They got journalists to write stories about how they'd soon have an app for neighbours last year - it still isn't rolled out in Europe despite all the press.
Love airBnB as a customer. 95% of guests are fine. 4% do stupid shit because they're drunk, which is understandable, but having continuously drunk 'neighbors' sucks. 1% are deliberately anti social. But the company absolutely does not give a damn about their impact on the people around them.
Tip for anyone else: call your police non-emergency number or your council. Avoid Airbnb support. They can't help and they won't take responsibility for the source of their income.
You can't know that and it by no means follows from what you've said. It's fine to describe your specific experiences, but not fine to cross into overgeneralized denunciation. Especially not to gin up indignation, which is pretty much the sole purpose of overgeneralized denunciation.
Other Airbnb neighbors may have a great time, but that doesn't mean I'm 'generalising' about them in a 'not fine' way when recounting my honest feelings after repeatedly dealing with them.
It's an odd coincidence my comment went from the top comment on this article to far down the thread in a single reload.
But it's not unusual for him to wade into conversations like this. What he's objecting to is an instance of a pattern that he has consistently been objecting to over the the last 9 months or so: commenters extrapolating the public policy intentions of organizations based on reporting about the behavior of those organizations. There's a term for that kind of reasoning: fundamental attribution error.
Given a couple minutes with the HN search bar, you can quickly find several other recent places where Dan has raised the same objections with respect to other companies.
I think "not attributing unproven intentionality to organizations" is a pretty good norm for HN to adopt.
That doesn't mean you can't make the argument that Airbnb is having a toxic effect on particular cities! It just means you can't make the lazy emotional appeal that Airbnb is run by people who don't care about toxicity.
I am recounting a year of direct personal experience, no reporting is involved.