Review Update inspired by our Community Center Hosts

[Laura_C]

At the end of last year, we announced several updates outlining new policies to help address irrelevant and biased reviews, a topic many of you understandably have expressed concern about. Thank you for all the feedback you gave in response to this, I've been reading all your comments and additional ideas on what you would like us to focus on next.  

Although only a few weeks have passed since then, your suggestions are already making a difference. 

One feature we've just launched (yes! It is already live!!), is adding a prompt to the overall rating section of the review process for guests:

If a guest gives 5 stars for all subcategories ie. Cleanliness, Accuracy, but then selects 4-star as an overall rating, a prompt flagging this to the guest will appear.

It was 100% your comments in these threads that inspired us to ensure this work happened. Shoutout to our hosts who brought this to our attention: @Sarah977, @Paola4, @Susanna0, @Laura108, @LuisCarlos1, @Aaron79, @Mariana58, @Justo6, @Rodrigo569, @Elmari0, @Melodie-And-John0, @Dee51, @Brian1595, @Peggy137, @Heidi313, @Ela22, @David64, @Anne8553, @Keita5

Of course, there were many other suggestions given and this is just the beginning of our work to make improvements in this area. Please do continue to share your ideas across the Community Center and we look forward to providing you more updates throughout the year.

~ Laura

[Rowena29]

@Lizzie   

@Paul1255, @Elena87 , @J-Renato0 , @Susan17 , @Jennifer1421 ,  @Huma0 ,

,  @Paul1255 , @Lisa723 , @Emilia42 , @Colleen253 , 

Ive already said this several times on several different threads, but I think the ebay platform has a reivew system based on very similar premises to  airbnb. I realise one is merchandise and one is hospitality  but really both are just acting as mediators to bring two groups in contact with each other. The big difference is ebay is much fairer ( now)

when I first started using ebay, it was extremely biased toward the buyer. 

If a buyer ( guest) made a complaint, and wanted a refund, they almost always got it. If they left unfair neg feedback, it was almost always left.

The company after a very long period of time have altered things so the playing field is a little more level. It is still biased towards the guest, but with more moderation

Here are some of the things that are different and work far better and are far fairer IMO.

.You always keep your total feedback score ( the number of people who have reviewed you) but the stars ( or % in ebays case) elapse after 365 days after they were left.   so if you're tanked by a bad reivew early on, you know that eventually if you provide awesome service, you can recover. Not like airbnb where you will remain affected til the end of time. Teh comment will always be there, for buyers reference,  but the stars expire.

If there is a conflict and the platform mediates, it asks for info from BOTH parties before it makes a decision. Factors such as the experience and the past history of both parties are considered - if there is a seller with a stunning history and a brand new customer, this is factored in , at least a bit. The actual process is quite rigid as you would expect from such a behemouth, but it does not make unliateral decisions without asking for input from both parties. Very obvious and desirable parallels here.

If there is conflict needing mediation, both parties lose the ability to review each other regardless of the outcome of the mediation  - obvious parallel, when there is obvious angst already in evidence, reviews are clearly going to be skewed adn biased and not helpful to anyone.

Even when mediation decides in one persons favour,  mediators if necessary give a warning .  eg we have found in your favour this time, but we note that xxx did in fact provide an accurate description and detailed photos. You may now request a refund but this action will be kept on file and considered against future cases ( in other words - we are keeping tabs on serial offenders)  The value of this is obvious for promoting a safe fair environment for everyone

Patently unfair reviews are removed by customer service.  Eg  if buyer  complained there were no straps  on a dress when this was stated in the description,  Customer service would take down that review if requested, as it was the customers fault for not reading the description properly ( lots of obvious parallels here)

The overall ranking is just   positive, neutral or  negative. 

This  is then qualified by subcategories of 5 stars  communication,  cost,   efficiency etc

And importantly if a subcategory does not apply, it can be blocked so there are no false star ratings as say happens when  guests and hosts rate each other for  non stay where a guest gives stars for cleanliness when they've never been inside.

Though far from perfect I find the system far fairer and far more reasonable. Iv'e never once mentioned the importance of a positive rating ( very important) because I dont' need to - it's self explanatory - unlike the ridiculous you have to be 5 star to be considered even adequate airbnb has us operating under.  You can get to being above average about as easily as you can get to super host.  To get to top rated, is far far harder adn is based solely on performance- so there is a badge out there that does genuinely mean something and is based on sustained excellence.  it's quite hard to achieve and quite hard to sustain and maintain. Thy're not handed out like lollies.

And one more thing ( not a ranking thing but obvious parallels ) if you can prove that you have provided the goods ( ie proof of postage) and it goes astray, that's  the buyer's loss, unless the buyer purchased insurance. Sellers aren't forded to carry the cost of the buyer's risk taking choices - parallel to extenuating circumstances clause

Most interesting of all though, things got much fairer to sellers  around the time amazon entered the marketplace. Until then ebay didn't give a rats a**se about it's private  sellers.  Now it gives them a modicum of respect.

while there is effectively a monopoly, there is no motivation to change.

[Trevor243]

Hosts and guests should be able to submit their reviews and read the reviews given before they are published to the whole world. That way, we can see any negative or nasty comments and discuss with guests and see if they will change their reviews. If a review is particularly unfair or nasty, we should be able to dispute it.

Another good change will be to prevent guests posting negative reviews after or because of a claim on damage deposits. Maybe give hosts longer to make that claim. Maybe restrict guest reviews once a claim is made.

Overall scores should be based on the average of each element. No separate overall scores and therefore no prompt. Questions for guests should be simpler / easier / more accurate, with fair guidance on what the review element means - so "location" should mean "was the property in the advertised location", not "is the area nice or not" because they are reviewing the property, not the area.

We could go on and on, but will we see any proper, useful changes?

[Ute42]

.

@Paul1255, @Elena87 , @J-Renato0 , @Melodie-And-John0 , @Susan17 , @Jennifer1421 ,  @Huma0 ,

@Rowena29,  @Paul1255 , @Lisa723 , @Emilia42 , @Colleen253 , 

How to change nothing

From sources close to the matter I heard, how the new „prompt flagging“ feature came into being.

Brian Chesky and Laura Chambers were having a business meeting in a conference room at airbnb-HQ in San Francisco.

• Laura: The atmosphere in the core host cummunity is bad, they don't like our review system. We should do something to lift their mood.
  
  

• Brian: Agreed. But remember our principle: We will never change the review system at all.
  
  

• Laura: I know. What we could do is this: If a guest gives 5* all across the board in all categories and only 4* overall, we could hold up a sign asking the guest if he or she really wants to do this
  
  

• Brian: But we don't want to do changes and this would be a change
  
  

• Laura: Not really
  
  

• Brian: Why not?
  
  

• Laura: We did the same thing already in march 2019 with location rating and it „changed“ the average location rating only 0.8%
  
  

• Brian: That's not a real change
  
  

• Laura: That's what I just told You.
  
  

https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Airbnb-Updates/Making-reviews-more-fair-for-hosts/td-p/958608

[Piotr48]

What does Airbnb reply when askd to remove a review from someone who never checked in?

[Susan17]

@Laura_C @Lizzie @Airbnb 

@Paul1255, @Elena87 , @J-Renato0 , @Melodie-And-John0, @Jennifer1421 ,  @Huma0 ,

@Rowena29,  @Paul1255 , @Lisa723 , @Emilia42 , @Colleen253 ,  @Piotr48 @Trevor243 @Helen350 @Ute42 @Sarah977 

We can talk about these minor, vague, long-overdue review policy tweaks forever; we can debate for years about the 5 star categories/4 star overall conundrum; and we can chit-chat about some hypothetical, pie-in-the-sky fantasy review system till the cows come home (so, are we to assume that the entire previous 11 years-worth of solid feedback and excellent suggestions on how the review system could be improved - from countless thousands of hosts and guests worldwide - simply didn't prove to be worthy or actionable enough to implement, and that we now have to resort to tossing around ideas for imaginary systems instead?) 

However, for the vast majority of hosts out in the real world, the harsh reality is, that this is not some fun, exciting, little brain-storming game that we have the luxury of time to sit around playing (in the vain hope that maybe, someday, somehow, Airbnb just might make a few substantive changes that actually benefit hosts for once, as opposed to benefitting everyone but  hosts)

This is real  life, it's happening now, and the utterly broken, manipulative, corrupted, worthless Airbnb review and ratings system is, in its current form, nothing more than an insidious, abusive, host-punitive behaviour modification tool. It's morphed into a sick, twisted parody of itself, has become the epitome of reputation inflation, is a total gift  to every amateur scammer and wannabe con-artist on the planet, and is trusted by nobody anymore. (Anyone who thinks otherwise, is fooling themselves) It needs total dismantling, urgently..

But instead - on a daily, systemic basis - the deeply weighted and biased Airbnb review system is costing real hosts (with real lives, real bills to pay and real families to feed), their income, their dignity and in far too many cases, their livelihoods. We all know this, yet still, we allow ourselves to be manipulated and controlled by it.

Seriously, how is this being permitted to happen, by a company that never tires of publicly declaring how much it "values our community"? How is it even remotely possible that huge numbers of hosts (including long-term superhosts) are still routinely being sent snotty, threatening messages by Airbnb, and/or suddenly finding their listings shut down, their accounts suspended/delisted, and their incomes decimated overnight (invariably without even so much as the courtesy of a warning or explanation from the company), as a result of a single, unsubstantiated review or complaint from a single vindictive, disgruntled guest, who didn't get their own bullying way? Please, Airbnb, explain how that constitutes a fair, ethical or trustworthy way of treating your host community? It's host abuse, plain and simple. 

And let's talk about the great big elephant in the room, shall we? The  subject of Allie Conti's Oct 31st Vice scamming article, (which was, of course, the true catalyst for all these hastily cobbled-together, largely-cosmetic Review and Content policy changes)... the proliferation of "hosts" (invariably, multi- and mega-hosts) on the platform, who are constantly flooding their own accounts with glowing fake 5 star reviews from myriad bogus profiles (often engaging in bait-and-switch shenanigans to boot), yet seemingly able to get away with plying their dodgy wares on Airbnb to their hearts' content, somehow flying under Airbnb's super-duper cutting-edge AI and machine-learning driven risk detection technology, for (very) extensive periods of time. 

Never mind the absurdity and incongruity of Airbnb's horribly-skewed star rating interpretations - by far and away the most damaging review-related issue facing every decent, hard-working Airbnb host, in every saturated and emerging Airbnb market on the platform, is the ubiquitous presence of the rogue wideboy players, riding high in the search charts, courtesy of their sizeable inventories, their shady ways and fraudulent antics, and their reams of fake 5 star reviews from their bogey profiles (while genuine small local hosts struggle to survive) 

Make no mistake - Ms Conti's experiences are by no means rare, or isolated. This is a phenomenon I've personally being observing - and documenting - for several years now. I've seen first hand how widespread the damage and destruction directly caused by these rogue players is, and the serious repercussions their nefarious actions have for all  small, local independent hosts in the markets in which they operate, and most perplexingly of all, the absolute ease and impunity with which they appear to be able to carry on operating, apparently undetected, on the Airbnb platform. 

Unfortunately, a full 3 months after Brian Chesky was compelled to announce these awesome "new" review policy updates at the New York Times Dealbook Conference (as a response to the outraged public reaction stirred up by the original Vice article), it appears to be business as usual for the unscrupulous Airbnb host. By all accounts - a follow up investigation by Vice (during the course of which they were contacted by over 1000 former Airbnb users with similar experiences to Ms Conti's), various media reports; popular travel blogs; STR-related forums; FB groups, my own research etc - it's blatantly obvious that the scammers haven't gone anywhere, are still rampaging all over the platform, and are still doing all  hosts (and the platform as a whole) serious short-term and  long-term damage. 

I'm fully aware that this is not what Airbnb wants to hear, and I'm equally aware that it's not what most hosts want to hear either, but we really need to start opening our eyes and ears to how the "outside world" sees Airbnb as a service, and increasingly, sees all of us as hosts. These are the clear and present threats we should truly be stressing about. The latest Vice article on Airbnb scams, and scamming hosts, certainly doesn't paint a very flattering - or hopeful - picture, and reflects horribly on everyone associated with Airbnb, but should be closely read by all.

Pay particular attention to the entire section on reviews (especially those who are into "educating" your guests on the vagaries of the Airbnb review system) The content and tone of the latest official company response on this should be studied very carefully, before deciding whether its still worth running the risk of being reported by a guest for this practice.

Jan 31, 2020.

Here Are The Most Common Airbnb Scams Worldwide

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/epgvm7/airbnb-scam-how-to-tell

And finally, on behalf of every host who has been, is being, or ever will be shafted by either rhe broken Airbnb review system, or by rogue hosts in their markets (or both), my queries to @Laura_C and @Airbnb are as follows.. 

1) What specific steps, if any, have Airbnb taken to address the chronic issue of fake reviews/false profiles/fraudulent hosts on the platform?

2) As a result of any successful actions already taken in this regard, please share exactly how many "bad actors" have been "weeded out" since the "improved and enhanced" policies were implemented, in what markets they were most active/prevalent, and how they were dealt with? (Suspension/Delisting/Other?)

3) Please clarify whether there would be any circumstances - ever - under which Airbnb would knowingly permit a "host"/account to remain active on the platform, that had fake reviews and false profiles associated with it. 

4. If "Yes" to Q3, please state the exact circumstances under which this would be permitted, and why?

5. Please state whether there are any circumstances - ever - under which Airbnb would temporarily remove a "host" that had been reported to them for fraudulent activity, delete false reviews from fake profiles on the account, and reinstate the "host" on the platform with a clean, sanitised profile, displaying only the genuine past reviews from previous guests?

And if "Yes", please clarify the exact circumstances under which that could be permitted to happen. 

Your comprehensive and timely responses to the questions above, would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. 

[Ute42]

.

Hi @Susan17 

here's something to cheer You up.

As You can see, You've got only one thumbs up for Your most recent post. You may now think that is bc people don't like what You've written, but that's not true.

There are 2 main reasons for this:

The number of thumbs ups depend on which page of a thread You post. There is an extrene example, and that is the thread „Clarity about the recent Superhost-criteria change“.

https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Airbnb-Updates/Clarity-about-the-recent-Superhost-criteria-chang...

I have posted in that thread, I wrote the second answer and I got 758 thumbs ups. That's a lot, but other people who posted an answer on page 1 of this thread also got many thumbs ups. The average thumbs ups on page 1 for original posts is 352!

If You look at page 4 of the same thread, the average number of thumbs ups for original posts is only 13.

So, the posts on page 1 got 27 times more thumbs ups as the ones on page 4.

Average number of thumbs ups for original posts depending on which page they appear in the thread

                                            „Clarity about the recent Superhost-criteria change“.

If You look at the very first answer in this thread You will realise, that this post has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of the tread, but it still got 71 thumbs ups. Why? It's post No1 on page 1 – unbelievable. It's not only that guests don't read our houserules, CC members don't read or don't comprehend what we write on here.

So if You want to reach many people You always have to post on page 1 of a thread. If You had written Your post on page 1 of this thread as opposed to page 4 as You did, You might have gotten 27 thumbs ups.

The second issue is, that people nowadays don't have the patience anymore to read long messages. The maximum lenth of attention You can get today from readers is what fits onto one page of a smartphone. That's the bitter reality. And Your post is pretty long. People start to read it, and in the middle of the post they stop reading, they don't even get to the position where they could thumb You up.

I hope this message lifts You mood for today.

@Paul1255, @Rowena29 , @Lisa723 , @Emilia42 , @Colleen253 , @Sarah977 , @Huma0 

[Colleen253]

I always read @Ute42  posts, and @Susan17  posts, no matter how long. Always worth it. Strangely, though I see I was tagged, I didn't get a notification that comment was up there. 

[Rowena29]

@Colleen253  I'm so glad you said that because I was also tagged and I also got no notification re this

[Susan17]

Aww thanks, @Colleen253 - that @Ute42 had me feeling very unkudo'd there.. 😉

I haven't been getting notifications when I'm tagged for as long as I can remember either. I hope it's not catching .. :))

[Susan17]

Lol! Thanks @Ute42, that did give me a good old giggle - but the day I start tailoring and strategising my online posts to get "likes", will be a cold day in hell! 😉

My goal on this forum (luckily!) has never been to collect "likes" - if it were, I'd have been sorely disappointed, and thrown in the towel a very long time ago! It's not as if I was ever under any illusions that my comments were winning me any friends or admirers around here.. 🙂

So you're telling me nothing I don't know already, really, but it's irrelevant to me whether my posts are too long for most people to stick with - those who seek the information my posts contain, are finding them, and reading them. That was always my ultimate goal in posting here, and why I stuck it out for so long (even when people made it crystal clear that they'd prefer me to just shove off!). But I achieved what I set out to achieve, and I'm told that my comments have occasionally prompted others to challenge their previous perspectives, and that's what cheers me up no end. 

Tbh, the majority of what I post is not - and never has been - directed to most of the regular CC users anyway, but specifically targeted at those who come here to find answers to rather different questions than the ones that typically dominate the CC narrative. And while I did tag others that had already been involved in the thread, my un-loved post was primarily addressed to Laura Chambers and Airbnb - it's primary aim being to solicit clear, direct answers to the questions I posed (particularly Q3 and Q4) Not that I'm holding my breath for those responses, of course (although to be fair, I do already know the answers), but a girl's gotta ask.. 

For sure, most readers probably won't get the significance or relevance of my post(s), (and they're always welcome to scroll right on by!), but I'm pretty confident that Laura and Airbnb will perfectly understand where I'm coming from with those questions (I certainly won't be expecting any thumbs-up from them either though)  😜

So thanks again for your care and concern (and the chuckle!) Ute.. but I got this..😉

[Jennifer1421]

@Susan17 

Thank you, once again, for bringing an article to our attention that outlines what a precarious position the company's complicity with fraudulent hosts puts us all in. The Vice article is beyond worrisome, and would seem to me to be a harbinger of bad things to come.

Out of curiosity, I went to the world's largest search engine, and typed "Is Airbnb". The first predictive phrase finished my query with the word "safe". As you point out, THIS is what we all have to contend with and should truly be worried about - a client base that is fast losing faith in us. I would concur that the reason is the platform's inability, or disinclination, to fully implement and enforce its own policies. The hand-wringing and cries of “we know our review system doesn’t work, but we just don’t know how to fix it” shown in this thread and others for years is clearly a sop thrown out to keep hosts somewhat placated. It is as cynical as it is condescending.

The questions you’ve asked @Laura_C  et al are highly pertinent and we deserve the answers to them. It is also highly telling that no one “in charge” can be arsed to even acknowledge them, let alone answer them in good faith…in spite of the “trust” and “value of hosts” so often referenced here.

 I’ve decided that these forums serve as a seawall. We wear ourselves out breaking against the rocks, and have nothing left with which to fight by the time we reach the shore. The frustration created by being ignored, or worse – patronized is at times almost more than anyone should have to bear…and yet time and again you post in the vain hope of being heard, managing to get through, making a difference. I, for one, thank you for continuing to try, even in the face of being censured.

[Susan17]

You're very welcome, @Jennifer1421. 

And thanks so much for kind words! This will be the very last thread I'll be participating in or contributing to on the CC though. I had planned to quit the CC anyway, as I feel I've gone as far as I possibly can go (and arguably, further than I should have gone!) with the level of unsavoury and unflattering information that I've been posting on Airbnb's own forum (without it being instantly deleted)

However, having already been admonished for posting negative content re Airbnb, and irrelevant links to other threads, and chastised for having a "marked bad effect" on other users (under threat of having my access to the CC restricted), has finally drawn the lines in the sand for me. I don't do well with being silenced, particularly when I'm telling nothing but the truth (and have all the evidence to prove it) So iI guess it's an opportune time for me to move on to the next phase. 

I may not be the type to go fishing for likes @Jennifer1421, but it's still good to know that at least a few of my fellow hosts do hear what I've been trying to give them the heads-up about, and perhaps (hopefully!) do even understand why I've kept on trying all this time, even though it did very often feel (and probably, sound!) like I was howling at the moon. (And yeah, I did definitely struggle to keep the frustration in check at times, so apologies to all for that!)

I will, of course, still be checking to see if either Laura or Airbnb anwer my questions though! 

[Mikki0]

I had a guest who didn't stay in my place. She booked at 8 am, showed up at 10 am even though my check in is at 3 pm. She sat outside my house, in her car, for over an hour complaining to airbnb that i wouldn't let her check in. I finally explained to airbnb that I had guests who had checked in the night before, and were entitled to stay until the 12 pm check out time.

Airbnb customer service cancelled her reservation with no penalty to either of us, and refunded all her money. But then they allowed her to leave a review. Without stepping foot in my listing, she left me a 1 star review, and with the comments that what could be improved was the layout, and cleanliness. 

So the review policy still needs a ton more work. 

[Emilia42]

@Laura_C 

I have read so many stories like @Mikki0's. How is this right?! How can Airbnb disregard a host's check in time? And how is this guest allowed to pull down, (or in some cases tank) a host's Cleanliness rating when they never stepped foot inside?!

Vice versa from a host's stanpont. How can a host still be able to give a cleanliness score for a guest they never actually hosted?! 

Please offer some advice here. When hosts never actually host a guest but are still given the chance to review, should we give all 1 stars for the three categories just to keep things consistent? 

[Mikki0]

And to add insult to injury, I had to write a blurb below her comments to make sure the situation was explained properly, and do it in a way to not sound vindictive or rude!