@Alba160
I absolutely agree with your point that Susan's many posts trying to reveal the darker side of some of Airbnb's policies (particularly the bizarre dissonance of the "pro mega host" tools gifted by the platform to hosts, which were denied smaller operators...whilst publicly suggesting that rental arbitrage management was *not* allowed) were made not for her benefit, or as some sort of personal crusade, but to serve as a tool for raising awareness among the membership, as a warning for us all, and as a plea to all of us to raise our own voices in protest.
I very much doubt I've read everything that Susan has posted to the forum, given how prolific a poster she has been. However, I've had a look at the Guidelines article, and what is not allowed. Beyond some "colourful" language (which was deleted pretty quickly, and which many of us have had happen occasionally) I can't see where she has run afoul of these rules in the posts of hers that I have read. How will any of us ever know, like @Anonymous ponders above, when our necks are on the chopping block. If the guidelines are open to such a wide interpretation of wrongdoing, none of us can feel totally comfortable voicing any opposition.
I am very concerned that banning Susan is to the detriment of the Community Centre. Not only does it silence a very knowledgeable and helpful member, but the lasting effect of it may be to muzzle many of us. Doing so makes the forum less useful overall, since we collectively do the job of Support personnel for free for the company, and definitely makes those of us who use it feel less like "community members". I, too, worry that the forum will become an echo chamber of endless praise for the platform, without criticism. This, of course, will lead to a less effective and popular platform, as experts on hosting no longer contribute, both out of disgust for the sycophantic slavishness on display here, should my concern be true, and for fear that speaking out in criticism will result in being banned as Susan has been. In such a way, Airbnb will lose out on important feedback meant to improve its platform, thereby eroding its popularity and our collective businesses.
While the brand has certainly been tarnished by exposes such as Alli Conti's Vice article, imagine the unseen erosion in both traveler's faith in the company and in hosting standards that could happen if such articles (and the awareness of them, brought to us here by intrepid members like Susan) didn't exist.
Of course, being banned in the manner that Susan has been also allows for a great deal of "shade" to be thrown without that banned member having the ability to defend him/her/them selves. Such is the case here for Susan, I think, with Stephanie being able to say whatever she's presumably being directed to say by Airbnb (i.e. there were "many conversations" with Susan "over many months" {which many of us know is patently untrue}) to justify this ban (NOTE: please don't read this as a dig at Stephanie - we should all realize that she and the other mods have zero autonomy to say what they may personally think or believe).
In effect, Airbnb, through the mods, have the ability to "whitewash" their own actions and ruin any of our reputations here without allowing the us the right of reply. Imagine, again, if you were a new, dewy-eyed host coming here, breathless in anticipation of belonging to a community of fellow hosts, only to read that a long time, and highly respected member is able to be arbitrarily banned and slammed by the same company that ends it's communications with "sent with love". I think such is every bit as damaging as reading some healthy (and deserved!) criticism of the company by its "partners". Banning Susan and silencing her voice here in the Community Centre runs absolutely contrary to the company's "everyone belongs" mantra, and serves to amplify the hypocrisy of it. "Everyone belongs, so long as everyone toes the line", is the message being amplified here.
I think it would very much behoove the company to have a fulsome, open discussion about banning in general, and the ban of Susan in particular. Hushing us on this subject, citing "respect" as a reason not to have these discussions, while no longer even using Susan's name is wrong, and very dangerous to the platform for the reasons outlined above. I'm 100% certain that Susan would have no qualms about this discussion taking place. In case it's needed, I have received express permission from Susan to discuss this matter publicly and privately and am able to provide such proof should it be requested.
I believe Susan's ban should be reconsidered and rescinded post-haste.
@Ian-And-Anne-Marie0@Sarah977 @Robin4 @Christine615 @Airbnb @Lizzie @Stephanie