Whoops... "Those were to prevent smells and ..."

I don't know, I've had more than a few hotels recently where you have to explicitly request daily service or they default to every-other now.

In general, I'm fine with that approach. But it does seem to be that hotels are also trying to skimp on cleaning.

Oh, that's not true. We've had plenty of guests vent straight to AirBNB. My "favorite" was one guest who complained to AirBNB that we wouldn't stop someone from flying a drone over the public beach that our condo backs up to. They wanted a refund because the drone was "invading their privacy". Mind you, we are 2nd floor, the windows are Low-E reflective (for those who don't know, it's very difficult to see in from outside when it's light out), and yes, the unit has curtains provided.

We host on AirBNB and make no money on our property. That's never really been our motivation. Our place is in St Croix, and we can only visit it a few times a year. Renting it ensures that people cycle through it. They report back when something looks off, which often allows us to catch an issue before its a significant problem. The money it brings in helps offset the maintenance cost. Which, to be honest, is pretty significant since our condo is ocean front and the salt is highly unkind to modern materials.

We do charge $180 for cleaning. We used to charge $150, standard rates for the island, and we got highly unreliable cleaners. At $180 we've gotten more reliable ones since we're paying above market rates now. We can't keep a stable cleaner to rely on because they mostly pick up jobs when they want to but at $180 they seem to be willing to do a good job when they do pick ours up. It's just a simple reality of having an ocean property on a small, relatively remote, island.

You're welcome to try for a hotel when to come to STX. King Christiansted is a decent one, but typically 30-50% over our rates. Some of the others, let's say, we've gotten a decent number of "emergency" bookings from people already in STX because they decided not to actually stay in their booked hotel.

I'm a host myself in a unit in St Croix. It can sometimes take a day or two to get a cleaner out to a unit after checkout. We never made any cleaning rules and never charged guests for not doing something. We did ask guests to take out the trash when they leave (the dumpster is about 20 feet from our reserved parking spot) and we did ask the guests to load and run the dishwasher in the unit (we provide the detergent). Those were to prevent smells and guests. We've never gotten pushback on those requests. I've found if you are reasonable with guests and your requests, they are reasonable back with what they're willing to help with.

They tend to lose their footing while trying to bring in a nice breeze.

In both scenarios, a gun was necessary. It is odd to me people prefer to arrest over deprecation of the required tool. Maybe rather than arresting someone for something they told a chatbot, instead red flag them and remove their access to firearms first?

Right⦠because EVERYBODY fully reads and understands the TOCs of every service they useâ¦

If an automated delivery bot crashes into a window and causes damage, the owner / operator of the bot would be liable. If the owner crashed into 1000 windows over months after already being alerted that was happening, they would likely be criminally liable. Why is it different? The damages are virtual rather than physical, but it is still damage and still cost resources the victim could have better allocated elsewhere.

War of northern aggression⦠havenâ(TM)t heard that phrase since I moved out of SC about 15 years agoâ¦

If you organized a community who reported the real time position of the officer, that would be legal in most cases. Just like the ICE protesters did.

Not disagreeing with the point you were trying to make, just the specifics you used to try to make it.

Traffic violation cameras are also required by law to be disclosed in many areas. Where I live there are multiple signs letting you know they exist on roads they are used.

Considering my LG TV just updated last week with a "no class action lawsuit" T&C clause, I'm pretty sure what they're saying is "yeah, we're screwing you, but we're hoping you accept these new T&C before you join a class."

I'll give you credit. You're great at picking sound bytes and quotes absent context to fake your point. Seems like you may be gunning for a FOX, Newsmax, or OAN "fact checker" in the future.

The Harvard lawsuit is still being adjudicated in the courts and proves nothing. It is an currently just an allegation at this point, which comes back to my previously, "guilty until proven innocent" comment. Thanks for helping to reinforce that point.

The FCC's broadcast license has historically been a technicality focused on making sure the equipment does not cause interference. But sure, in your world that means, "we don't like you, so we can take it away because.... reasons!" Show a single instance, prior to Trump, of the FCC doing what they are attempting now.

Just because you don't like the concept of DEI does not make it unlawful nor discriminatory. In fact, the proper venue for that is first a court, and if a court did happen to agree, a potential license review might be justified. This is "guilt until proven innocent", and it's solely done because the Orangeutan doesn't like their content, which is a blatant first amendment violation.