Not sure what “your opinions might be conflicted by your dual role” means, maybe you can expound?
But I agree that anyone should feel free to express what they expect from someone on the other end of the exchange. That helps everyone – and especially those who don’t have experience on both ends of the exchange – understand one another’s point of view.
I just mean when you express your opinion as a sitter your role as a HO always influences that slightly. And vice versa. So qualifying your opinion by stating you can see it from both sides (as though those who either sit or or are HOs exclusively aren’t capable of doing so) doesn’t necessarily mean that’s an advantageous thing.
It’s actually quite common and standard protocol for individuals with vested interests in both parties to recuse themselves of involvement in disputes between these parties.
Weighing in an stating that because they have interests in both parties and can see it from both sides doesn’t actually add any more weight to their opinions relative to those that only have interests in one party - quite the opposite in fact.
And a sitter or HO who acts in that role exclusively is more likely to have a one-sided or polarised view but that’s not necessarily a bad thing or should mean their opinion is invalid - sometimes that might be needed and more advantageous.
I’m a homeowner I would never let a sitter use my car. I’m from Canada. If one of my friends or relative uses my car I know that they have car insurance and a license so I’m okay with this. If they get into an accident in my car, its their insurance that pays not mine. This is the same as you renting a car in the US or Canada… If you have car insurance for your car at home, you are also covered on a rental car and don’t need to purchase car rental insurance. I would hold out for someone that is prepared to rent a car or use public transit if available. And, no you weren’t unreasonable.