[loy22]

One question remains to be cleared: how did the guest got inside the apartment? What was the system used for the key transaction?

I don't know how it usually goes, but I'd like this blind spot to be cleared. She published a number, an email address and a nickname on her blog, but no postal address. So the keys weren't shipped.

She never called the number, and can't tell the gender of her perpetrator. Only the neighborhoods acted as mere witnesses of a "group of people" coming in. This suggest that nobody else was involved in the transaction, no friend or neighborhood to give the key and see the guy.

So the guys "came to her house" and got inside, but it doesn't tell us how. Nobody has been in physical contact with them, and the keys weren't shipped.

I don't want to sound insensitive, but this blind spot buggers me a little. Wonder if she can tell more about it, even if it doesn't sound relevant to her horrible experience. I believe her, maybe the key transaction process was bit naive as well and it wouldn't be relevant (hiding the key somewhere), but it could also mean that the burglary might have happened after the host left (while still being an improbable hypothesis, it would just open a new possibility). It's just a small bug that I'd like to be squashed.

[jcunningham]

I don't think she needs to explain every technicality of what happened. The police will deal with those matters. She's not on trial in the court of public opinion.

[loy22]

Actually she is, and she has already won by a landslide against AirBnB. She's the victim and I wouldn't want to be in her shoes, but I also find the reaction disproportionate toward AirBnB. It's only fair that those "techicalities" are made public as well before everyone trash them to death.

AirBnB gives tools to pick your guest, the first one being the track record and ratings. Was the rating of Dj Pattrson Good/Bad/Virgin?

They also have a pretty straightforward safety tips page ( http://www.airbnb.com/safety ), but not a single precaution was taken. It appears she didn't even try to call her future guest. No neighborhoods or friends warned, nothing.

AirBnB is taking all the shit for an objectively irresponsible behavior. Nobody deserve what has happened to her, it's just horrible. On the other hand, AirBnB taking all the shit for this doesn't seem fair as well. They handled the crisis in a poor manner, but the perpetrators should be the ones paying for the damages.

AirBnB aside, she doesn't seem to take some responsibility for it (the rape victim analogy), and it's just not fair or reflective of the whole picture, if you're being objective for a minute this is the simple truth. I truly hope she will recover and learn from this awful experience.

[jacquesm]

Actually, she chose to make this public, and she chose to do so apparently because AirBNB refused to move on terms that are acceptable to her.

Nobody here is claiming that she is 'on trial', but when you go public with a story there will always be questions.

That is because people will align with your story and your interests if they consider you to be the party that is speaking the truth.

This is a fairly normal thing and has nothing to do with trials. You are seeing this much too black-and-white.

[ChuckMcM]

"Nobody here is claiming that she is 'on trial', but when you go public with a story there will always be questions."

By now, it should be pretty clear to everyone that she is 'on trial', although perhaps not by choice. I've observed with events prior to this that anyone can start one of these public trials by posting an accusation publicly. Then that opening statement is responded to by the defendant, also publicly. At which point its 'game on' as it were.

I suspect it is a natural consequence of the desire to know by the folks involved, whether its poor EJ here or 'geohot' or Charlie Sheen. Everyone wants to know "what is right?" or "what is the real story here?" and that process that people go through and the community that participates in it, has all of the elements of a trial. Evidence is uncovered and presented, testimony is called for and presented from various people involved, pundits line up to endorse or discredit evidence and/or folks testimonies.

So there are a lot of questions. Clearly there is a lot of outrage here and elsewhere. Hopefully it will be sorted out to everyone's satisfaction, and it certainly will provide a test of AirBnB's management team.

Like many here, I share the outrage and the commensurate desire to help. I recognize that being effectively outside the event horizon (wasn't a witness, not a personal friend, not an investor, not a freelance plaintiff lawyer, etc etc) I'm limited to offering moral support.

[bugsy]

I agree completely that Jacques is putting her on trial. His claims he is not are about as disingenuous and manipulative as if someone said "Nobody here is claiming that Jacques is a 'cat rapist', but when you go public with a story there will always be questions." That is absolutely not just a casual well intentioned statement. It is a carefully constructed propaganda attempt designed to attack the target while superficially maintaining plausible deniability.

[skue]

> she chose to make this public

But she did this on her personal blog! She didn't go running to the media or fan this story. The story got picked up here then exploded. That was not her choice, and it caused her privacy to be invaded again -- by folks like us trying to figure out who she is, how credible she is, what she should or shouldn't have done, how she's feeling, etc. -- all while she's still recovering from the initial episode.

If you're referring to her follow up post, don't you think she's entitled to speak up to address this discussion, given how the circumstances unfolded (again, which she never chose)?

[jacquesm]

There was actually a considerable effort by friends of hers to get this story promoted.

And it worked, very well.

[foxit]

What are you talking about? I posted the story here after a month had gone by with no word of what the outcome was. It was picked up and went from there - I do not know her and nobody who does had anything to do with it.

[jacquesm]

I'd like to take that off-line, but you don't have an email address listed. [e-mail].

[mpyne]

So put her friends on trial then. I really though society in general grew out of punishing related persons for the crimes of others....

[bugsy]

> she chose to do so apparently because AirBNB refused to move on terms that are acceptable to her

There you go again Jacques with your wording that is designed to raise suspicion on the crime victim and her motivations. You pass her personal identity to an investor with a billion dollar reason to silence her, you say she should show proof she was really robbed in the form of photographs on the internet of her personal private home that was already violated, and now you are implying that she went public because she is greedy and is leveraging negative publicity in a negotiation of settlement terms. Yes, you will respond to this that you are not implying any of that and, but that is bullshit. You know exactly what you are doing Jacques, it's quite clear. Jacques, I want an answer for you, what are your financial and professional relationships with YCombinator. That's two questions there.

Putting her on trial and stalking her is disgusting. Your claiming you are not doing it as you are doing it is not fooling anyone. You are a psychopath. Stop what you are doing right now.

You want to know why she went public? BECAUSE AIRBNB DID NOT KNOW THE IDENTITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT THEY ALLOWED TO ROB HER HOUSE. That is legal negligence on their part, but it also created a situation where she is not safe. Not that she "feels unsafe". This has nothing to do with feelings. She IS unsafe because the people who robbed her apartment stalked her by email, manipulated her, and were still out there at large a month after the crime was discovered. Their stalking was almost but not quite as malicious as you are being right here right now with your public insinuations.

[jodrellblank]

She IS unsafe because the people who robbed her apartment stalked her by email, manipulated her, and were still out there at large a month after the crime was discovered.

On the other hand, she had the good luck to be criminalised by people who went to all the effort of using a service to make sure the home they robbed was empty instead of chancing it on one that looked empty, to lie to her during the crime to keep from being discovered, to be gone before she returned, and to have not returned for a month afterwards.

I wonder if there are any studies indicating if she would be at statistically significantly higher risk of crime than most people now?

THE PEOPLE [AirBnB] ALLOWED TO ROB HER HOUSE.

And you accuse jacquesm of manipulative wording.

[jacquesm]

> I want an answer for you, what are your financial and professional relationships with YCombinator.

None and None. That's two answers.

Whether you'll believe me or not is another point of course.

[jcunningham]

So this is not a trial but she needs to publicly provide documentary evidence for everything she has said up to this point, including photos of any damage and her entire "email cache"?

Please tell me who she owes this responsibility to?

[TeMPOraL]

> Please tell me who she owes this responsibility to?

To the people, if she cares about public opinion.

> That is because people will align with your story and your interests if they consider you to be the party that is speaking the truth.

This summarizes it all.

[ulisesroche]

So, by this reasoning, who does airbnb owe responsibility to?