|
Post by High Priestess on May 15, 2016 21:53:15 GMT
So, to post a photo in a reply --
If you are getting the photo from somewhere online, just to to the photo where you find it, put your mouse cursor on the photo, and right click on the photo. THis will cause a pop up box to come up which gives you options as shown here: (I am aiming to copy the Tarot card image that has the lady with the three eyes) Next, RIGHT click or LEFT click on the line that says "copy image address". Then you have copied that image address.
Next, paste that image address into your post. To do that, set the mouse cursor in the post and right click again, and you will get an option to paste the address there. Now once the image address is there, you have to add certain things in front of and behind the image URL for it to show up in the post. Basically you need to add to the front of the image address a [ and then img src=" And at the end of the URL add "]Do that as here: and then post the post and the image shows up in it, like this: If you do it this way, there is no limit to how many photos you can post in any one post. It is much better to post them like this than as attachments, since this forum has a limited amount of space available for actual attachments. But when you post a photo not as an attachment but through the URL, it doesn't need to be saved in the memory on this forum, as it just finds the photo in its location elsewhere on the internet.
|
|
|
Post by becks on May 15, 2016 22:03:04 GMT
OK, I can see how to insert a link to the image, just that some of the images i wanted to insert are massive! I wanted to save space and be neat. Ah well... start again...
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 15, 2016 22:11:28 GMT
If you have large images you can reduce them in size using www.tinypic.com --- you can upload images there and resize them. You have to down load images first from the web, putting them on your computer, and then you can put them in tinypic from your computer. So it is an extra step involved. But you can use tinypic for free.
|
|
|
Post by becks on May 15, 2016 22:32:33 GMT
Can you insert Dropbox links? Er no, apparently not!
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 15, 2016 23:27:41 GMT
I tried posting a link from dropbox and it doesn't work well. I suggest using one of two methods to post photos (either from your computer, or from an online location) , both of which are explained in my thread on how to post photos on this forum, here: globalhosting.freeforums.net/thread/77/set-account-post-photos-forumALternatively, if you have trouble doing that, you can take a screenshot of the photo and add the screenshot as an attachment to your post.
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 15, 2016 23:30:45 GMT
Or if you really can't figure a way to post a photo, send the photo to me in an email and I can post it for you!
|
|
|
Post by becks on May 16, 2016 0:21:10 GMT
It's ok Deborah. I'm really not totally technically incompetent, honest. I just spent a bit of (fun) time choosing images and downloading them, imagining it would then be straightforward to upload directly. But I get that there's limited space!
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 16, 2016 1:03:33 GMT
Well you can post them as attachments if you find it hard to do that another way...no prohibition on attachments...but if we get a lot of attachments I would have to start "pruning" them (probably remove some from older posts first) or then new ones wouldn't fit. But we aren't near that point yet - we still have a lot of room!
|
|
|
Post by helgaparis on May 16, 2016 21:39:38 GMT
I would probably have taken the tatooed guy - tell me what kind of criminal he is. Maybe after a search for the symbolic of the tatoos. The fat guy looks like an actor on in Hawai 50 - could not take him, my furniture would break down. No way the babies, even cute, enter here;-)
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 17, 2016 0:02:10 GMT
I wasn't able to see what kind of criminal the tatooed guy is -- the photo just came from a website that has some criminal mug shots on it, but no explanation of each individual.
You're quite brave, Helga!! But of course the babies dont' come free and in many cases no matter how cute they don't come at all.
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 19, 2016 15:50:10 GMT
Update: (and posted on Anecdotes: www.airbnb.com/groups/content/content-222059 ) now Greg Selden is filing a Class Action lawsuit against Airbnb based on his 3 photo experiment: money.cnn.com/2016/05/18/technology/airbnb-lawsuit-discrimination/skift.com/2016/05/18/airbnb-sued-for-allowing-racial-discrimination-by-hosts/mashable.com/2016/05/19/airbnb-lawsuit-racism-discrimination/#.PBs7M0l6GqzA copy of the lawsuit: skift.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/airbnb_suit.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am very curious to see how this will all fall out. I had earlier (years ago) predicted that the vulnerability faced by those advertising housing on Craigslist, regarding the potential to be accused of "discrimination" by someone who was denied housing, could emerge within Airbnb advertising as well. Which was why I found it surprising that so many hosts felt free to state things like "no children" in their ads, when this could expose them to accusations of illegal discrimination under the Federal Housing Act. Many times I warned hosts about putting "no children" in their listing, but for some reason hosts did not seem concerned about this issue.
I hope that the fact that this lawsuit is now being filed, will make it clear to hosts first that they DO need to be just as cautious and careful about how they handle requests from prospective guests, as they would with a Craiglist ad. And secondly I hope that this does make it clear that anyone can file suit or file a complaint alleging discrimination at any time, really on any basis. They dont' even really need to do a 3 photo experiment like Greg did. It would probably be sufficient simply to be declined by one host, without any explanation being given for the decline, to file suit alleging discrimination. WHich is why I find myself very curious where this will go...will we see a trend, of people leaping onto the discrimination-suit bandwagon and suing Airbnb when they are declined? My own experience with the legal system has clarified that lawsuits can be filed really with the very thinnest of fragments of a possible allegation. And in many cases, as I found as well, the willingness of attorneys to take a case on contingency, is based not upon the strength of the evidence, but upon the political climate in which the case finds its context. The more the politics of a region/era support one's cause, the less "evidence" one may need, to win the support of an attorney for pushing the case through.
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 19, 2016 16:41:01 GMT
ANother thought on this issue -- which will no doubt raise a great many thoughts among many hosts, particularly with lawsuit in place --- is that all along I have wondered about how Airbnb will be viewed legally, particularly the more involved it gets with hosts and hosts' listings. I have all along wished that Airbnb would be little more than a more "sparkly" version of Craiglist, thus to allow hosts the greatest measure of independence and freedom in offering what they themselves want to offer, at the prices they want to offer, without meddling from Airbnb in managing hosts' listings, ratings, threats to remove listing over low ratings, etc.
The fact that Airbnb collects the payments from guests and transmits them to host, makes it different than Craiglist, but if this third party payment were all that were involved, I think actually Airbnb could still be relatively comparable to Craiglist in terms of legal position regarding claims for discrimination.
It could be viewed as beneficial for hosts, if Airbnb is the party sued in allegations over discrimination, rather than the host themselves, since that could be viewed as protecting the host from liability. HOwever, the down side of that, is that if Airbnb is viewed as liable, rather than the individual hosts, who knows what this exposure to liability could result in, in terms of response from Airbnb ---- and how this could impact hosts and hosts' own freedom to run their own business, offer what they want to offer, to the kinds of guests they want to have, and be able to decline anyone on any basis without being required to give an explanation for that decline.
Could exposure to such liability result in more of a "Big Brother" company, which takes a heavier hand in running host's businesses, demands reasons for each decline, sets up a complaint and investigation department to handle complaints of discrimination, and is prepared to investigate every "decline" which results in a complaint by a would-be guest? Could hosts find themselves at some point required by AIrbnb to use instant book and accept all comers, as long as they agree to house rules? As I have expressed before I have considerable concern about greater "policing" of hosts, and so any new developments which seem poised to prompt this, are of concern to me. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This post by Andrew came next -- I re insert it here: On the merits, this lawsuit bears a striking similarity to the landmark 1994 lawsuit against Denny's, in which the restaurant chain ultimately paid out a $54 million settlement to thousands of black customers who reported being denied service or treated poorly. In isolation, many of the incidents would have been harder to substantiate as racial discrimination; however, in aggregate, the vast number of allegations made the pattern undeniable. Like Airbnb, Denny's certainly had no top-down orders to discriminate against black patrons - the discriminatory acts were committed by unrelated individuals acting on their own. On the broader implications, though, there are some huge differences that show us how this could turn out to be an important case - one whose results may actually benefit hosts in the long-term. The first being that a chain restaurant is unequivocally a "public accommodation" in the eyes of federal law, but there is currently no federal precedent on whether Airbnb is in itself a public accommodation. The plaintiffs' argument hinges on this notion: Airbnb is an inn, hotel, motel or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests. And, furthermore, the notion that hosts act as agents of Airbnb (like Denny's staff act as agents of their employer) rather than as independent lodging providers: Airbnb’s agent, representative, servant or employee Hosts purposefully and intentionally discriminated against Plaintiff because he was an African American by race. A ruling on this matter could clarify, in the eyes of the law, whether the accommodation provider is the platform or the individual host. I don't know which way the wind is blowing on this now, but it's a matter that will have to be settled before any cohesive legislative consensus can emerge about what the rights and responsibilities of hosts are, and which party bears the greater burden of liability. The idea of hosts being treated as agents of Airbnb is quite a stretch, as Airbnb has no selection process for hosts that would establish a transfer of responsibility and accountability. Anyone with a vendetta against Airbnb could create a listing and purposefully use it abusively to attract litigation to the brand. In the event that Airbnb is indeed determined to be a public accommodation, we need not panic that Airbnb will force us to take all comers into our homes (which would obviously lead to far worse lawsuits from hosts who are harmed by guests they didn't want). Even more so than Uber, Airbnb's business model fully depends on the understanding that hosts are independent agents - I don't see how it would be able to operate in a jurisdiction that disagrees. If there's any chance that this case could lead to a ruling that makes Airbnb the responsible party, I think they'll settle out of court to avoid the precedent. If that happens, I can see Airbnb taking greater measures to prevent stupid declines like the one Selden experienced. The host was wrong to say that the room was "unavailable" while leaving the dates open and offering it to what appeared to be other guests. It's never good business sense to make demonstrably false statements, especially when following them up with rhetoric that bolsters a claim of racial bias. A "Big Brother" approach is unlikely, as its immediate effect would be to drive hosts away from the platform in droves. Airbnb has no room inventory of its own; it depends on keeping us feeling comfortable and safe using their service, and our autonomy is critical to that. At any rate, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
|
|
|
Post by Maria Lurdes (Milu) on May 19, 2016 20:16:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 19, 2016 20:35:53 GMT
@milu --- The article you provided a link to, has many comments posted on it, among which I found these: yvanehtnioj Anna Merlan If I dig deep into the recesses of my Property Law memories, I recall that racial discrimination in housing is actually allowed when you’re renting in your own house or anything smaller than a 4-plex (if the owner also lives there). This was the Murphy exception? Any landlord-tenant lawyers want to correct me on this? If I’m right maybe this lawsuit and the “sharing economy” will finally get that challenged/changed. 40 Reply yvanehtnioj yvanehtnioj 5/19/16 11:22am Okay, it’s actually called the Mrs. Murphy Exemption. tinyurl.com/hsugj8d Very interested to see if AirBnB rentals fall under it. As discussed in this space in past posts, our federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) contains a handful of exceptions, the most famous of which is the “Mrs. Murphy Exemption.” This provision in the law provides that a home is exempt from the FHA if the dwelling has four or fewer rental units and the owner lives in one of those units. The exemption is based upon the hypothetical elderly widow, Mrs. Murphy, who would like to rent part of her home and who may desire to specifically pick out her tenants. DarthPumpkin yvanehtnioj 5/19/16 11:26am Found this, tinyurl.com/gmfhnt9 www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-rights-book/chapter5-2.htmlwhich seems to agree with your assessment. That being said, might the court decide that Airbnb is governed by different rules, given that the tenant-landlord relationship involves them as a third party facilitator?
|
|
|
Post by High Priestess on May 19, 2016 20:43:27 GMT
I agree Andrew that it will be very interesting to see how it all plays out. I'm hoping that some questions actually are answered by the suit, rather than simply resulting in a settlement, without answering or dealing with any legal questions. Many people are wondering exactly what the laws are and how they apply to Airbnb and hosts, how hosts are related to Airbnb, is Airbnb a public accomodation. I think it would be very surprising if a ruling stated that Airbnb was a public accomodation when laws currently clarify that hosts who offer space in their own homes, are generally not public accomodations.
It's true that Airbnb taking more control over hosts' homes would drive hosts away ---- which makes me all the more curious how Airbnb would react to this suit and others like it that may come down the pipeline. What policy decisions may come out of it.
I actually am surprised it took this long for a discrimination suit to appear, given the number of hosts who have very little or no experience renting out property, who may have absolutely no knowledge of antidiscrimination laws, and who thus could be expected to not take adequate care in how they respond to those interested in renting.
|
|