Don't exaggerate. There is a difference between doing online business and leaving an optional review.
OP was still able to use Airbnb, they just removed one positive review possibly because they have no online history making it hard to distinguish them from a bot or puppet.
I'm not the same person, and the question still applies. If you're so pedantic, then,
> Since when is a social media account required to leave reviews?
It's just as absurd when written this way. But, please, show me the exact place where Airbnb (or any other big company) says that a social media presence is required to leave a review. I'm waiting.
Show me where Airbnb promises to accept every review? I'm waiting.
Edit: furthermore spam prevention takes all sorts of random signals in to account. Having no online presence other than a single stay in Airbnb certainly looks suspicious.
Nobody writes their spam detection algorithm as policy.
What indication do you have that such a policy is even remotely in use at Airbnb or another company?
Nobody writes their spam detection algorithm as policy, but there is also no evidence whatsoever that social media presence was in any way shape or form used to make the decision here. Airbnb at no point mentioned it, nor would it have been something that crossed your mind if original commenter didn't mention it as a fact about themselves.
I'm not arguing that Airbnb does use presence/lack of social to make a decision here. I just objected to you saying
> Since when is a social media account required to do online business?
I interpreted that as you being outraged that Airbnb requires some form of social presence to do business. I felt you were exaggerating and responded by saying its just about the review. I meant that even _if_ Airbnb is checking this, it's not a big deal cause this is just one of many signals that could feed into spam detection and we're only talking about the _review_ not the ability to use Airbnb at all.
You raised a valid point earlier, I doubt they're actually checking this, my point is just that even if they are, who cares. OP looks suspicious by having no online presence at all and only one stay on Airbnb. That combined with the language in their review probably tipped the spam filters to say "hey it's probably safer if we don't let this review through, doesn't seem legit"
> they have no online history making it hard to distinguish them from a bot or puppet
Huh? Airbnb has the entire transaction history that matters – proving that this specific user paid a specific amount of money for staying in a specific place for a specific amount of time.
Thinking that you need to prove "online history" (how would you even track this?) as well is absurd.
My theory on this is the same as usual – Airbnb outsources or understaffs their customer service department as usual; some stressed out agent closed the case without even looking at it. Making some noise and opening a separate case will probably work if you're bothered enough.
Yeah, but I don't think Airbnb has sophisticated enough infrastructure to figure out if every person leaving a review has an online presence before deleting their review.
It's possible there's something more mundane, like not having a browser cookie when the review was left or something like that.
Indeed. It's easy enough to funnel the money back to somebody you know, paying the 3% commission to Airbnb. There are probably tax ramifications too but as a business cost for a glowing review with no effort, worth it.
It sounds like they suspected you're in cahoots with the host. They don't need to verify that you are in cahoots or not for booking, if a host wants to put themselves then whatever, but if the review looks supisiocus they'll delete it.
Yes this is exactly what they do, and what happens with many Amazon items as well, and for Booking.com
It is not really a big cost because you only really need to pay the platform fee (you control both sides of the transaction do the only real cost is the middleman).
Reviews are super important and it is hard to get booking when you have 0 reviews so it is not surprising that some hosts would spend some dollars for 3-4 fake positive reviews to kickstart their property (many people will bounce off the ad without at least a couple positive reviews, so it changes your business radically)
Except you are describing the opposite of what is being done. Not positive reviews, but negative reviews. I can certainly see astroturfing your own properties with great reviews, but negative ones? That is a situation where you do not control both sides of the transaction, so a high price to pay to put a "fake" negative review on a property!
In the case I commented on they left a positive review. I'm sure many hosts will accept the Airbnb fees once to boost their rating. Especially if they're starting out, early reviews carry more weight.
You're not wrong. However, if a company uses my presense (or lack of) on social media as a way to make judgements I will not give them a penny of business.
It's important to note that they were happy taking money from Guests. It's only the reviews they're blocking.
Reviews are an auxiliary cost to Airbnb. They need moderating and their Hosts complain and use up support time if bad reviews are let through. I suggest profiling users is a quick and cheap way they've done the sums on to weed out the easiest level of abuse (on both sides).
They're not going to lose any business until it affects you.
They mentioned not having social media accounts to show that AirBnB couldn't have any information about them or them being related to the host. (OTOH, their namesake may have a social media account and that may be linked to the host. In theory.)
A lot of moderation is made to sound more certain than it is.
"We have a suspicion based on this data we don't have that you might not be a real customer so we're blocking your reviews" invites a whole lot more customer support time than "We're not accepting your reviews."
It is simply cheaper to be firm, however unfair it is when they get it wrong.
See what happens if you ask a bank for a loan with no credit history.
Of course these are only tangentially alike, but public history is an important way to distinguish organic reviews from AstroTurf.