the very first question asked of the guest in the review is...

[Lawrene0]

Hello, fellow hosts!

Last week I was a guest for three nights. Not keen on travel right now, but I had to for work. 

It was interesting to see, though, what guests are asked these days.

So, first of all, the stay went very well. The host sent daily messages asking whether everything was okay, and I replied as soon as I could every day that, yes, everything was fine. Lots of thanking each other on both sides. The usual. 🙂

I opened the review link at the end of the stay. The first question was,

"Did you feel unsafe during this stay? We would like to know what happened."

Good lord. Shouldn't I have notified someone immediately if I had felt unsafe? Why would I leave it to the review? Do they want me to be that sort of guest? 

Anyway, the second question was all about whether the host was misleading or I had any issues.

Screenshots of both are below. I took them because I was appalled that the accent is on the negative. "Unsafe", "misleading" -- what's that all about? 

In my own case, I am waiting for a review from my own guest a week ago, a local who thought I should have notified her that she might hear rumbles of thunder in the distance during her stay. Oh goody. Now she can report that she felt unsafe because she didn't think to check her weather app.

I feel like this is a trap. I feel like there are enough traps with the reviews that we don't need another one. 

The rest of the questions were about whether the amenities were provided, etc., but I have seen those before. It was just the first two questions that were different from last time I was a guest. Just to be clear, this was not the "survey" at the end. This was the start of the review, before the stars, before the written portion.  Here are the screenshots:

[Mark116]

@Robin4  Yeah, we have been down this road, but baiting the guests to call their stay 'unsafe' and then tell Big Brother what happened is low even for Airbnb's already low standards in terms of how they treat their largest asset.  It's really odd that they have developed such an antagonistic attitude toward the hosts who provide the actual service they're selling.  

It is also worth noting that at least in the U.S. the term 'unsafe' is one of those trigger words that will create a full stop/review/investigation etc of _________ as soon as someone says X made them feel unsafe.  So, again, it is very strange and troubling that Airbnb would choose such loaded, inflammatory terminology.  

[Ute42]

.

@Robin4 

You've just posted this upthread:

----------------

ROBIN 2020

„For the hosts: If you are a superhost with an average rating of 4.8* = 96% and you get a single one star review, You need 19 five star reviews to make up for that, but no matter how many 5 stars you receive, you will never again be a ........5*.

This is the way this review system works......... You can end up in this weird situation:

Host A:..............5* x 1.................................................................................average: 5,0

Host B:..............5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....

….........................5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....5*+5*+5*+5*+5* + 1*.................average: 4,8

So host A with one review has a 5 star rating while host B, who has 20 five star ratings is an inferior host compared to host A who has just one 5* rating only?“

------------

You forgot to mention that You've copied this almost 100% from my „Guantanamo“ thread.

https://community.withairbnb.com/t5/Host-Circle/Guantanamo/m-p/754779#M6666

------------

„UTE 2018

„For the hosts: If You are a superhost with an average rating of 4.8* = 96% and You get a single one star review, You need 19 five star reviews to make up for that.

Also, with this reviewsystem You can end up in this weird situation:

Host A:..............5*.................................................................................average: 5,0

Host B:..............5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....

….........................5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....5*+5*+5*+5*+5*....1*.................average: 4,8

So host B, who has 20 five star ratings is an inferior host compared to host A who has one 5* rating only? Come on.“

--------------

Why did You leave out my final remark „Come on“? I thought these 2 words added a lot of credability to the points I was making!

[Ann72]

@Ute42 -  I thought that looked familiar!

[Alon1]

@Robin4  @Ute42

Ute, 

In the past few years, quite a few times, I've attempted to redress your 'Guantanamo' theorem. I repeatedly demonstrated that its a fallacious model as it does not include the crucial factor of time.

I've further identified that your lack of comprehension is based on your very limited experience as an Airbnb Host. Nevertheless, Robin who is highly experienced with lots of Reviews remains fixated by your theory.

I basically stopped hosting earlier this year, and don't intend to do for the foreseeable future.

However, at present I still hold the Super-Host badge, which I obtained only in the last of 7 years of Hosting. My 5 listings comprising 377 Reviews currently display overall averages: 4.47, 4.51, 4.59, 4.65, 4.71

According to Ute theory I would not have been hosting at all.

Please understand I don't need a reply from either of you. It's you who need to scratch your heads wondering how it's possible. If you wish to know how, then please check for my copious explanations.

Best Wishes,

Alon

[Helen350]

@Alon1 Your listing ratings of 4.47, 4.51, 4.59, 4.65 & 4.71 are averages  from your WHOLE 7 years of hosting... Whereas 'Superhost' status is based only on the last year leading up to the assessment date... So you must have averaged 4.8 over your 5 listings in year ending 1 July 2020; or actually 1 Apr 2020, as SH status was preserved in July for Superhosts  who, because of Covid, could not host post 1 Apr. - Hope this makes things clearer!

[Alon1]

@Helen350 

I know that full well. You don't need to explain it to me. It's exactly the explanation I have given many times.

What you need to do is peruse Ute''s model and explanation, wherein "4.6 = Delisted."

  This is nonsense.

   4.2 renders a '5 Day Suspension' and some listings are still active at 4.0 even 3.9..

In short, Ut's model simply does not factor in the accumulation of scores over time. 

I really don't want to spend more time on this. I fully understand what I'm saying based on my figures over 7 years. 

[Ute42]

.

@Alon1 

You wrote to @Robin4  and me upthread:

• Please understand I don't need a reply from either of you.

I thought that remark was pretty arrogant. This is a discussion forum. Anyone who posts something should be prepared to get an answer. If You don't want answers and if You don't want to discuss, why did You publish Your post in the first place?

Alan, You are not telling to write or not to write on here. If I feel like, I will publish 17 answers to Your post. You understand?

[Alon1]

@Ute42 

You're absolutely correct. You can post as much as you like.

The only thing you seem incapable of doing is acknowledging my critique of your "4.6 = Delisted" which is nonsense; and explain how I could survive on lower figures for 7 years?

I feel obliged to redress it every time it comes up because what you are doing is scaremongering new or inexperienced hosts. I'm sure they take more comfort from me realizing they can perfectly survive and flourish as hosts with lower ratings. 

Consequently, If you chose to engage with this issue, then we can have a proper discussion, which will end as it must with your correcting your error. 

[Ute42]

.

@Alon1 

You are accusing me of having posted false information in my thread "Guantanamo".

The false information in question: "4.6* = delisted".

On may 26, 2018, fellowhost Rebecca160 posted this screenshot from her dashboard:

As You can see, airbnb told her at that time: „Your listing could be removed if You consistently fall below the targets.“ And one of the targets was to maintain an average rating of 4.7*

Here's a sreenshot of the first part of rebecca's thread from 2018:

As You can see, the requirement of maintaining a 4.7* rating came into effect on Juli 1st, 2018. This requirement didn't exist before. Maybe that explains how You survived the first 5 of Your 7 years on airbnb with Your badly rated listings.

On july 14, 2018, I published my thread „Guantanamo“, that was 2 weeks after the new requirement programm started. How could I know at that point of time, if airbnb would in fact delist or remove listings from the platform or if this was just a hollow thread, as we say in Germany? At the time I was writing „Guantanamo“ I was working with the information I had and everything was correct on my part.

Alon, what You doing here on an ongoing basis is, You are trying to discredit one of the best threads ever published on this forum by proving that there is a major mistake in it. There was no mistake at the time I was writing it and so there's no need for me to admit a mistake.

You though should apologise for the nonsense You are posting.

What You're doing here is shady, Alon.

Cc:  @Mark116 @Ian-And-Anne-Marie0 @Robin4 @Helen350 @Ann72 

[Alon1]

@Ute42 

We all got the same. 

It's what Andrew from Berlin calls Airbnb's  'psychological manipulation'.

But in reality no one ever got delisted for 4.6 average. 

You swallowed Airbnb's fear mongering and enshrined it in your post. 

Moreover, you hardly host on Airbnb so taking anything from you is meaningless as far as I'm concerned. And for the little you have hosted, you have an awful lot to say and lecture other people on this website.

Lastly, I don't and never have considered my ratings to bad at all.

My interest has always been the Reviews not the Ratings, for the simple reason that its the Reviews which influence prospective guests.   

[Ute42]

.

@Alon1  

• „But in reality no one ever got delisted for 4.6 average“.

I know, but You and I didn't know that in july 2018.

You've lost this one Alon. Come on, admit it 🙂

[Alon1]

@Ute42 

Of course I knew it, because I was either on or below 4.6 in July '18.

But more importantly, it was purely your interpretation of one of the four 'targets'. 

And in respect of this one target, before that date, Airbnb would have had a similar threat for the preceding %s as they were at the time. If anyone cares to check the records. 

If you wish to update your chart based on reality, then 4.3 is ok.

(4.3 translates as 86%. It means of 20 ratings, one only needs 6 x 5* and 14 x 4*)

4.2 = automatic '5 Day Pause to Listing'

Delisting is below 4.0 or 3.9.

[Ute42]

.

@Alon1  

You wrote:

• Delisting is below 4.0 or 3.9

That is not true. This is a screenshot I have taken on Sept 1, 2018. At that time I was doing a research on the impact of Superhost and average rating on the positioning in searchresults.

Here's a closeup

As You can see, No 1 in searchresults out of 300 listings was a place with an average rating of 2.5* And No 2 was a listing with an average rating of 3.5* As You can see, they were not delisted. When I saw this I realised, that there must be something wrong in the world of airbnb.

The reality, Alon, is, that airbnb's announcement that they might remove our listings if we fall under 4.7* was just a threat. Many people still believe it today, but I don't. But I did in july 2018.

Alon, I'm asking You, pls don't confuse Your fellowhosts with incorrect information. We all are having a hard time with airbnb already.

[Alon1]

@Ute42 

You've proved your own point! 

It suggests that you should have corrected the 'Guantanamo' post within 2 months of posting it, more so as you believe the post is very popular, you continue to contribute to the confusion.

I was never confused because of my own figures. Indeed, I've just checked my current 'Overall Rating' = 4.58. That is for 377 Reviews for the 5 listings over 7 years. This figure was even lower in mid-2018 and lower still when the SH programme was introduced c. 2016. Consequently, you can understand why I always challenged your comment "4.6 = Delisted".

re. Super Host.

       I never had any interest in SH because I started hosting in 2012-13 when SH did not exist, and by the time it was introduced I was sufficiently experienced to know it did not matter. Guests had long booked without it, and continued to do so. So I had zero aspiration for this artificial award. Moreover, what attracted prospective Guests has always been the Reviews. That is what they would mention in Enquiry, not the Ratings; and the vast majority of guests are oblivious to the significance of SH.

Lastly, the only persons who ever say I have 'low ratings', is on the Community Centre, precisely as you and Robin just did in the past 24 hours, that's because you are aware of the Airbnb definition of high and low ratings. I have never put any stock by this definition and no aspirations in this regard. I find it quite absurd, especially considering a figure of 4.5 translates as 90%. Low by who's standards? Some idiots sitting in a bubble in San Francisco.

Brian C and his mates have completely lost touch with reality considering how they began with a few airbeds. 

[Ute42]

.

@Alon1  

Thank You for the answer. It's a little long, I will read it overnight and may come back to You tomorrow. I can't work on it right now as we had some heavy rainfall and we have to fix the gravelroad with our excavator.