Having made two posts in the past in which I expressed frustrations we have experienced with some applicants and finding that participants who chimed in have moved those posts onto completely different topics, I would like to address some of the responses I did that pertained to the original two posts. I attached proof of these occurrences (with names redacted to preserve privacy)
Sitters who apply and then back out of sits for a better offer or a paid sits.
Sisters who apply without being available for the posted sit dates or not having the minimum # of reviews as requested in the post.
For the issue about the sitters backing out due to other/paid sits, several sitters insisted this NEVER occurs, and two flat-out said that I was making this up. So please see one of the more recent messages (I redacted names) I received in which a sitter did just that - as you can read in the second paragraph of the first attachment, she wrote that during busy travel times, she prioritizes paid sits.
For the post about being able to set criteria that would filter applicants (in my case, meeting a minimum # of positive reviews). I was met with complete vitriol despite the fact that sitters can filter petsits (and usually do so by location). Several sitters insisted that It is wrong to filter sitters at all, and a large number of sitters responded that they do not consider reviews of homeowners or care what condition the home is in because the only thing that matters to them are the animals (which I find remarkable). Their perception is that they are volunteers who receive zero benefits from housesitters and only do so because of their desire to serve pets. Therefore, homeowners should be grateful for any application whatsoever and not judge sitters by their reviews.
I will share with you that I have never met such sitters, as every single one I have worked with not only found my sit because they filtered the posts by location but also expressed that they applied because of my strong reviews, and most vetted me far more than I did them - which is their right, of course. They often ask me what I do for a living, where I am traveling, what I will do when I get there, and what my plan is if I encounter any unforeseen delayā¦I could go on. If they need this info to vet me, then so be it. I have no problem as it is their right to ask questions. Most require a video walkthrough of my home which I am happy to oblige. One sitter even had a list of 31 (yes, 31) questions she needed answered in detail during our Zoom. Included in this list are questions about my neighborās daily habits (when they tend to come and go, noise levels, etc). She also insists that homeowners not only send her contact info for two backup sitters but needs to zoom with them as well before accepting the sit. While some might find this degree of questioning demanding or intrusive, I feel it is her right to ask whatever she wants. So why was I not put off by this? ā¦Because she had many outstanding reviews, which helped me to understand that her detailed questioning was simply because she is very detail-oriented, which is a big plus! So from my perspective, reviews are absolutely important.
I find both of these example responses from sitters absolutely OK and understandable. . The first said sheās withdrawing her application in favour of paid sit opportunities, which is her right. It does not sound like sheās cancelling a confirmed sit which would be not OK.
The second one sounds lovely and is only wishing to show her future interest in the only way current possible- āapplyingā whilst a host has live dates. I have done that on occasion too but I always withdraw my āapplicationā after the host has read ny message so as not to block one of the 5 spaces.
I can see your point HOWEVER ā¦neither withdrew their applications. I replied to the first one and asked her to withdraw her application, yet she would not do that. Can anyone tell me what the reason they would have not to withdraw their applications?
In the past week, I did a similar thing where I contacted an owner and said I would withdraw my āapplicationā once it was read. Instead, the owner just declined it. Fine by me. I didnāt get annoyed that I didnāt get the opportunity to withdraw! The outcome is the same in that the listing is opened up to another applicant which is what an owner wants.
@CAadventurer in such a situation all you have to do is decline the application! You declining the sitter OR the sitter withdrawing their application brings the same result!
Iām not sure why one would use time asking someone to withdraw, as just hitting the Ā«declineĀ» would serve the purpose in less time? Ofc not everyone knows one can just do that.
While some people can be online or on their phones throughout the day, this is not the case for others. Due to the nature of my work, it is not possible for me to monitor my inbox and read applications while at work. After a long day at work, it is very annoying to discover my sit was paused all day because āapplicationsā like these cause my inbox to hit the max # of 5 (triggering THS to pause the sit). This happens more frequently than you may think and delays the process of securing a sitter, because I have to repeat the process of declining and unpausing day after day while the sit is paused for 10-12 hours at a time.
Do you still feel it is inconsiderate for sitters to send these types of āapplicationsā and NOT withdraw their applications to free up space for others - which they could do right after submitting them with one simple click since they are already on the site?
please see my response to Lockstar who said the same as you. You may not have considered that not everyone is always able to be online during their workday.
@CAadventurer
I was responding to your comment that you requested a sitter to decline and they did not, when all you had to do was hit decline rather than wait for them to act.
All HOs and All sitters are affected negatively by the 5 applicant limit. And we all do what we need to do to secure sits.
Not all sitters know they can withdraw their āapplicationā after submitting it- they might think their whole message will then get deleted. That is not the case but it took me a while to figure out that strategy and others may not have done so yet. Its unclear.
You are frustrated by your listing getting paused and sitters are frustrated if they canāt apply because they missed being in the first 5!
THS unwelcome changes donāt make it easy for any of us!
I would just assume you were online as you asked the sitter to withdraw, while you could have used less of your work time pressing Ā«declineĀ» (ofc provided you knew that was an option. )
Iām not sure of the purpose of this topic as your previous topics of the same issue is still open (?). If you are not happy with the applicants you get you can decline them continously. However, if you only get applicants you are not happy with, there might be something that makes the sitters you do want choose not to apply.
Personally Iām not affected badly by the 5 appl. rule.
You missed the point - these nonapplicant applications cause the site to get paused for 10-12 hours before I can even check my inbox. This would not happen if they withdrew their application after submitting their desired email. I will still get their correspondence if they withdraw the application, and then it will leave the space available for someone who can do the sit. You seem to feel this is too much to ask.
So, Garfield, please share why exactly you feel it is okay to apply when not available and then not be courteous enough to withdraw the application to keep the site visible to others.
The reason for this post is that my previous post morphed into a very active and spirited discussion about insurance, so I figured I should let them continue their discussion since it has nothing to do with the original post.
You seem focused on that one example and not the point which is that more frequent cases in which sitters apply just to say hi, send emails with dates they would like to come, or ask me to consider their friends who donāt want to pay for accounts on THS (why I have no idea), or the myriad of messages that are not helpful in filling the sit yet clog up the inbox which I cannot check until evening.
The reason I asked that one to withdraw was because another HO suggested that there may be some sort of downside for them to withdraw applications, and so I was hoping to find out if that was true and if so why would that be the case.
(edited by Forum team in line with our Community Guidelines around kindness and respect)
I was not going to write anything on this topic as I had already answered your questions on other topics but you seem really focused on specifically getting the lines you want to read so I will write them again and phrase them the exact way you need:
Yes, I do āfeel it is inconsiderate for sitters to send these types of āapplicationsā and NOT withdraw their applications to free up space for others - which they could do right after submitting them with one simple clickā provided they know that is the case.. I know and I have done it in the single occasion I got in touch with an owner for a sit I thought was a real good match but I was not available for the dates listed.
That said, you seem to read more than people have really written in their posts. I donāt think anyone said
What you describe now is a very different matter from your original post. But some would reach out like that - and some here in forum would also advice to do reach out like that, and will say it has worked out for them (and then I imagine also for the host in question). They would as I understand often withdraw when the message is read.
My point stands, it seems (it would be quicker to decline them than ask them to withdraw, so why would it be a problem to do what will get the job done with less effort?)
Iām not sure what you want with your final words, but weāll leave it at that. I get unsolicited invites from time to time, usually from someone who has clearly not read my listing, I choose to not put a lot of effort in it and just decline. This is a matching platform where fellow, paying members will try to connect to make matches. It is normal procedure that most reaching out will decline and/ or be declined.
(edited by Forum team to remove a reference to a moderated comment by another member)
On the upside, at least it sounds as though youāre getting loads of applications!
Most people probably just donāt realise they need to withdraw their application, if theyāve reached out to a home owner with a ānon-applicationā. I did this myself recently, because the sit looked like a perfect one for me but I couldnāt make the dates. I received a lovely message from the home owner - despite clogging up their inbox - and hope our paths will cross in the future.
@CAadventurer it would be best to address these concerns with THS member services ( they donāt read the forum )
Many sitters would like to be able to contact hosts without taking up an application space but there is no way to do this other than applying at the moment .
In the past THS have suggested that sitters use the apply button to contact a host so your questions are best answered by them .
The issue here seems to be the 5 application limit. As @Silversitters said, you should really direct your complaints to member services. Sitters are paying members too and just want to be able to use our membership. HOs can contact any sitter at any time. Sitters can only contact HOs when there is a live listing. Everyone is just trying to work within the limitations THS has put on us.
As far as the sitter not withdrawing after sending you a message, maybe they wanted to make sure you got their message before withdrawing (so you didnāt just get the auto message that someone withdrew). Maybe they just expected that you would click the decline button once you read their message. You chose to take the time to ask them to withdraw rather than just clicking decline. My understanding is that you still have to unpause even if someone withdraws.
The 5-pause limit has been a much hated policy since it was implemented, but despite all the complaints, THS hasnāt changed it.