Hi @Lizzie
1-First of all I think all the "texts about changes" are easy to understand.
2-Yes, it is an improvement in terms of requirements to evaluate the Superhost. If implemented it certainly would be all good measures. Anyway, I think this kind of improvement could be still better. I have some suggestions below.
3-Yes, it would reduce the stress and fear of losing the superhost status for receiving some stupid and unfair review or because one of the listings are more suitable for mid and long term, what would cause less number of reviews.
Below my feedback given by individual items (changes):
>>>1-Number of trips: 10 trips OR 150 nights in the past 365 days, instead of 10 trips currently
Of course I have to agree!
I have suggested something very similar in this discussion, on the second post of the page you reach by going to the following link.
https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Hosting/Long-Term-Rentals-Penalize-Superhosts/td-p/836827/page/2
>>>2- Number of cancellations: 0 cancellations in the past 25 reservations (with a max of 1 cancellation per year), instead of 0 cancellations in the past 365 days currently
It think is fine !
>>>3- Average overall rating: Exclude one outlier low-review in the past 365 days from the evaluation
I also have suggested something similar twice or more times in this community.
I think this change can be bettered.
As far as I can find one of the links, my suggestion is writen in the following page of this community .
https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Hosting/Show-Our-Overall-Rating-To-The-Hundredth-Percent/m-p/666...
IMHO, I think what I have said before in the aforementioned link should be considered (between quotes):
"I think that the assessment system should have a way to disconsider automatically 5% of the worst reviews, and to balance it, it would be necessary to disconsider also 5% of the best reviews. It would avoid huge discrepancies. This kind of "methode" to correct discrepancies is used in stastics and also in some types of "olympics games" to prevent that one member of the jury produce a completely wrong outcome in terms of general avaliation."
In addition, I think that, this method should be used to evalute each listing that a host/superhot have. For example, if the host has 3 listing, on each listing, 5% of the reviews should be disconsidered. The reviews should NOT be erased, should be only disconsider during the evalution process.
Thanks for taking our opinion into consideration! 🙂