• zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Get paid by landlords to remove negative reviews, like yelp. Offer to show all reviews, even removed ones, to renters that pay for the premium service.

        Ew, I feel gross after coming up with that idea.

        • Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s a lovely pattern to look out for, your efforts to show just how ugly it is, are welcome.

          For anyone considering implementing this: No.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I just left a building with 4.5 stars on Google that was an absolute horrific nightmare. Somehow they had gamed the system so that all the recent very negative reviews got mostly taken down or hidden. Do NOT trust Google reviews if you have any inkling the place is sketchy. (I did but the reviews and price were good)

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Indeed, while this idea should work in principle, I’ve found it mostly useless in practice.

          I don’t know if all large apartment complexes are notoriously bad, but a few years ago, you’d mainly find horrifically negative reviews on those sites (likely because only people who have had issues with them actually bothered to write a review in order to get their petty revenge on them).

          Nowadays, all the management companies are aware of these sites, and they likely either pay Yelp to “manage” their reviews for them and/or incentivize their tenants to leave positive reviews (even though that’s technically against the rules). Meanwhile, small buildings generally aren’t even listed on these sites or don’t have nearly enough reviews to get an objective picture.

  • boatsnhos931@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Life hack: lie, steal and manipulate. Or be a honest homeless person. It’s definitely not going to bother me.

  • jaybone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Some landlords will give good recommendations for shitty tenants, just so they can get rid of them.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      One guy I bothered every day about his other tenant stomping across my ceiling. That landlord gave me a fantastic recommendation because he was tired of having to do any effort whatsoever instead of just receiving money for doing nothing.

      I saw that tenant as I was moving out, “I don’t understand the problem, I always wore my indoor boots?” Fuck apartments lol.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      lie through your teeth, the landlord won’t hesitate to blatantly lie so neither should you.

      oh no no mr landlord sir, this isn’t my dad, this is my “previous landlord”!

    • frank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I was thinking the same. Let me interview non-management members of the team to see what working there is really like.

  • TAG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    It is an asymmetric relationship. The landlord only cares if a tenant can be trusted to pay rent and not trash the place. On the other hand, the tenant is getting a service (shelter and upkeep) from the landlord.

    Like other service providers, an aggregate rating is probably more appropriate. Some people are fine as long as they have a roof and indoor plumbing while others rate 1-star if the water takes a minute to warm up. Some tenants care about kitchen appliances while others care about an updated bathroom. Some like to be woken up by the first rays of sun while others want a dark room to sleep in. It is important for tenants to both get a good aggregate of a landlord’s quality but also understand if the landlord’s faults are ones that they care about.

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Being a landlord is morally wrong. Shelter is a human right, not a service. The service that they provide is not calling the cops to evict you so long as you pay them. They don’t otherwise provide you with anything.

      • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        So, grocery stores are morally wrong? I mean, food is a human right, isn’t it? What about hotels?

        Providing a necessary service in exchange for money isn’t morally wrong.

        Not everyone wants to own property. It’s a huge financial liability, and a pain in the ass, tbh. I actually know people who sold their homes and moved into apartments because they were sick of the time and money required to upkeep a house.

        While there are absolutely landlords who are immoral, especially corporate landlords, saying that being a landlord is inherently immoral is just incorrect.

        • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          I do agree that grocery stores are morally wrong in some sense yes. People should not have to lend their bodies in order to eat. Hotels aren’t morally wrong entirely, because they’re only providing a place to stay temporarily. If they did provide long term stay and charged for it than yes that would be morally wrong. You’ll note that I’m an anarchist.

          There is no such thing as a moral landlord. And the people you’re talking about downsized. The landlord does not do repairs, he hires handyman and trades workers to do repairs. The landlord collects a tax from you while giving you nothing in return. My rent is twice the monthly cost of a mortgage for a mini home in my area.

          When you have a mortgage the money isn’t gone when you spend it, it’s used to pay off your loan. When you’re done you own the property.

          I will never own this property. None of my money is returned to me. It is taken by a person or entity who literally does not provide me anything.

          I’ll repeat, providing shelter isn’t a service. What the landlord is providing you, is not evicting you so long as you provide them a taxation of your wages that goes straight into their pocket. If all landlords died overnight nothing would materially change except for all the people renting could now keep their wages, and hire the handyman to do the work themselves. Housing co-ops also cover the costs of upkeep by pooling money to spend. No, landlords are 100% immoral 100% of the time and your buddy who’s a good guy and a landlord might be a good guy but it has nothing to do with his being a landlord. Some cops save dying animals and volunteer at soup kitchens I’m sure, they’re all still bastards by participating in a system of militarized state violence.

          • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            You must know nothing about owning a home if you think rent just goes straight into a landlord’s pocket.

            Also, dealing with contractors is a service that’s being provided. Having to hire a contractor is often a pain in the ass.

            Having both rented and owned, renting is much less stressful. You apparently don’t see any value in not having to worry about maintenance, taxes, massive debt, liability, insurance, etc. which is fine, but that doesn’t mean paying for it is a scam.

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              You must know nothing about owning a home if you think rent just goes straight into a landlord’s pocket.

              Is the landlord making a profit? That comes from rent going into their pockets.

              that doesn’t mean paying for it is a scam.

              Choosing to pay for it, sure. Most renters would rather own but can’t because landlords have bought up a limited supply of a resource in order to profit off it. When scalpers do that they get vilified, but do that with something necessary for survival and for some reason it becomes an investment?

              “People with more money than sense would rather pay someone else to do it” is not a good argument for forcing everyone else to also pay someone else to do it.

            • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              My rent is 50% of my income I will never get back.

              No, renting is literally incomparably more stressful than owning a home would be where I could sell it at any time and get a portion of my invested income back.

              If I could opt out of my landlord calling the plumber when I need one, I sure as fuck would if it meant I could keep my money. No, my rent goes straight into his pocket every month and a fraction of a fraction ever comes out to cover upkeep. I’d happily opt out and pay it myself.

              You sound like you’re probably decently middle class. Which is fine and I’m not saying that you have no experience being a lower class renter. But you probably are not familiar with the same financial pressures we live under today.

              Landlords should not exist. Nothing would be lost if we converted every apartment building into a co-op. We would all have much more disposable income and much more control over where we lived.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Oh my sweet summer child.

        We’d all love to live in a socialist utopia where a house to live in is the right of all citizens, but sadly that’s just not a reality here on planet earth.

        “Shelter” may be a right, as in if you’re destitute you’ll get food and something to keep the rain off, but a nice house to live in is not a right.

        Ultimately landlords are providing capital, which you need to pay for a nice house. Providing said capital is not in itself immoral.

    • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      If you’re a landlord then surely you have the power not to do this with your property or properties?