@Huma0
Of course, we don't know the full story because we are only hearing one side of it, but I find it interesting how, in most cases, when a host posts on here complaining about a guest, the majority of responses are supportive, even though we don't know the guest's side of the story, whereas a guest complaining about a host often gets attacked.
Where was this guest @Netta5 attacked specifically? And you'll find that the CC has a non-discriminatory policy in treating hosts & guests equally badly and in equal amounts, but finding out the facts usually gets to the truth.
All situations depend on evidence being provided, Netta was asked questions to corroborate her story which she refused to answer or illustrate, so based on that she's being deceptive. Being provided only half of a story is manipulative, and so you need to ask the question why? The obvious answer to that is that she wanted to get moved from where she is at, for whatever reason, she already stated she was refused that by Airbnb, so now what is she doing here? Looking for sympathisers? She got those in a truckful, and most insisting the host should provide additional service items not listed. No he doesn't - No to whatever your argument might be, he just doesn't.
It doesn't matter one bit how deep you want to delve into Netta's history of reviews, to our faces she's being deceptive whilst building a case against her host. I judge what I see here, not what some review has said. To me, only what exists here actually counts for anything and deceptive is as apt a description as I can find for the avoidance of providing truthful answers.
Whatever the problem was, the excuse for it was that the place had not been booked for a while and sitting empty. Well, that's not really a valid excuse.
And who gave you that excuse Huma? It wasn't the host giving that excuse for anything. It was just a guess, by Netta: "(I guess because of the time of the quarantine there were no guests here)". Rather ironic though... a dishwasher, stood idle, building up with calcium(?) all by itself because it's not being used? You'll find that generally using something leads to build-ups of deposits.
Now Huma, what assumptions are you stating that I'm making? I've already said that factual details are needed to corroborate a story full of holes, and without those facts how can one judge? I'm the one not making assumptions. I've asked specific questions which have been avoided, so I can only speculate based on the lack of answers to those.
So me not making assumptions, and me not claiming to know the full story as the story is full of holes, it seems that only one of us has any interest in finding out what the real story actually is,. That isn't going to be found by raking up any old review data, rather, truthful answers and seeing the extent of the claimed problem would help.
