zlacker

Dan as mentioned upthread, if you think my repeated contact with AirBnB over a year, and the impression I've had as a result, isn't substantive, could you explain why or email me if you prefer?

I've been on Startup News / Hacker News for eight years, so I'm pretty familiar with the site.

>>nailer+(OP)
You're responding to something so far from what I said that I don't know quite what to tell you. What I said was that you shouldn't have posted this to HN:

> But the company absolutely does not give a damn about their impact on the people around them.

... because (a) you can't know such a thing and (b) it's corrosive of the kind of discussion we want here.

Reporting specific experiences is fine. Crossing into grandiose denunciations is not. Those add no information; their purpose is to gin up rage, which puts salt on the slug of thoughtful discourse.

>>dang+1K
I'm responding to exactly what you're complaining about:

> > But the company absolutely does not give a damn about their impact on the people around them.

As mentioned repeatedly, that's an honest impression from a year of constant engagement. I have in no way said it is AirBnB policy to not give a damn, simply that as someone who has attempted to engage the company about these matters, they appear to not give a damn.

> Those add no information

I very much disagree that the resulting impression does not add value, and HN would seem to agree, as evidenced by the HN community's reactions to your post.

People can and do post impressions of services on HN, and have for some time. Part of handling yourself properly is not only avoiding impropriety but also the appearance on impropriety: being told not to post my impressions of a company that is incompetent enough they've repeatedly stated they cannot match an address to a listing looks very poor when YC has a financial interest in the company.

Respectfully, you were wrong on this one.

>>nailer+GK2
I'm surprised that you keep insisting on this. Your statement that I objected to said "absolutely does not". Your defense of it here says "appear not to". Talk about moving the goalposts! If you had said something like "based on my experience they appear not to" in the first place, obviously there would have been no problem.

Perhaps that's all you meant to say, but what you actually said went far beyond it in a way that is corrosive to thoughtful discourse, which is why I objected.

>>dang+iQ3
You're trying to make up for a mistake by trying to invent a contradiction that does not exist: there is no contradiction in saying Airbnb appears to absolutely not care.

I am recounting my own person experience, so, very obviously everything is how Airbnb appears to me, and I'm sure you're intelligent enough to know that. And again, it's quite reasonable to say that based on those experiences, which I'd be happy to provide police reports, screenshots, and contacts at my local council, Airbnb absolutely does not care.