You can write a response to this review, giving your version of events.
Did you mention this lack of communication in your review of the sitters? I’m not sure what you mean when you state:
Sitters cannot delete what is written in reviews, unless they can conclusively prove to THS that what has been written is a false allegation (or so I believe from reading these boards, I’ve never had to challenge a review myself).
Surely that can be achieved by encouraging more comprehensive reviews? If stars are docked, it should be explained in the review.
My last sit i received a 1 star review. 20 other reviews on me were 5 stars. The situation felt unsafe to the point we left while the HO was still home. I think this sit would work for someone if they understood our concerns and i would be happy to discuss that with a potential sitter if asked, so this function would be helpful. On a positive note i wrote a calm and honest response to this very bad review and now that i am back on the web site i hope that my approach to that helps smooth over things so i can get some sits again!
Maybe some sitters treat reviews like people on eBay who don’t leave feedback. In both cases you’re “supposed to”, but they just don’t bother. So if that was the case, they might not bother to respond to a query from another sitter either.
I was speaking about a Nomador experience…
Totally agree. Sitters need the option of being able to contact sitters who have not left a review about the owner. Only once in my 20 + sits did I not leave a review. There was a real communication problem during the sit, the owner shouted at the pet for not running to her when she returned from their week away as the pet had already bonded with us and ran to us instead of running to her. After the sit,We asked they owner to confirm that she found everything ok and we had left a small gift for them as well as a cooked meal. There was no acknowledgement of any of this. We were left bewildered and never knew why she behaved this way so there was no option but not to respond. There were red flags though - poor communication before the sit ( which was a second sit with this family)
Agreed — and after recently also experiencing a rise in casual flakiness (not receiving reviews, no welcome guide, or just a few scribbled notes), it’s obvious this should be a non-negotiable standard too.
A warm thank-you over WhatsApp is always nice — but in this context, it’s beside the point. A review is the bare minimum and the least you can do
I have given this a lot of thought since I first saw this post a few days ago, and decided that I think the negatives of such a system would outweigh the positives.
First of all, sitters have an option of including their LinkedIn profile in their sitter profile if they wish. So, if someone is really motivated to contact a sitter, they could do so that way.
However, as a sitter, once I leave a sit I want to be done with it. I have moved on. Having someone contact me about a sit I did three months or more ago would just be - disruptive. For example, I did a sit last year for a cat with multiple medical needs. It would make me feel super awkward if a current sitter contacted me to ask the best way to give the cat her pill or whatever. Once I’m gone from the property, it shouldn’t be my business any more. And what if they contact me to ask for the wifi password or whatever? All kinds of stuff could happen.
It does seem simple to say, “Well you can opt in or out to being contacted!” But people read all kinds of meaning into that. Opting out of being contacted might be interpreted as “Hey, they don’t care about offering advice on how to give that cat the pill!” We have so many cultures and so many perspectives on this platform. For example, I have a friend who sits who reads nothing - NOTHING - into the fact that someone does or does not leave a review. Many people on this forum seem to think that is a red flag. I’m guessing there are a lot of people NOT on the forum who are like my friend, who think that a lack of a review just means that the people have moved on. They see reviews as optional.
In general my preference is that THS keep the functionality focused on matching sits with sitters. And anything extraneous to that should be approached with extreme caution and input from multiple cultures and perspectives with plenty of testing.
I agree with others that back-channeling conversations doesn’t seem like the best solution. The conversation(s) with the HO are the appropriate place to get to know them and their expectations and style… reviews from sitters augment those insights, but direct conversation with the HO should really be the focus in determining whether/not a sit is a good fit. questions you ask could include “what did/didn’t go well on previous sits?” …which of course only gives the HO’s side of any story but will still give signals as to how they interact with sitters. and when any weird gut feelings come up, just walk away and find a better opportunity.
I’ve thought about starting a sitter only FB group, but I also know that would be a mess to admin! But yes, having a sitter only forum or messaging ability would be great.
I’ve met other sitters on instagram and we share potential sits that way. Like, if I know a cool sit because I’ve been there before but we can’t make it, I will share the link for her. It’s nice to be able to chat about what the pros/cons of the sit were like with someone whose been there, and to do so offline, not behind the verbiage of a review.
I understand what you are saying, however, people are already “reading into” many things about reviews; how they are worded, lack of reviews, etc…so “opting out” could potentially cause some people to wonder but no different than what is already happening. Some people just want their privacy and don’t want to be bothered. I can’t see reading something negative into that. Not leaving a review at all gives off way more of a negative connotation than opting out of being contacted IMO.
I mean, this is moot bc THS isn’t going to do it but I think it would be valuable.
I leave very honest but nuanced reviews bc people’s interpretations and standards are all SO different but one on one I would be fine giving a better description of the sit. Once explained another sitter could make a better judgement call if the sit is right for them or not. For example, one persons standard of “clean” is so different from another. I am not going to go into great detail in the review but would do so with someone who reached out.
So many things are subjective. Giving examples and context would help some of us make better choices and avoid a mismatch.
IMHO.
I have mixed feelings. In a business, continuous improvement makes sense—but the beauty of THS is its simplicity: a house needs care, I love pets and travel. If everyone’s safe, that’s success.
I’ve seen platforms start out wonderfully—genuine, collaborative—then devolve into ego, competition, and metrics. I’d hate for THS to become about stars, reviews, or popularity.
The purpose of reviews should be to help us assess risk. They’re not perfect, but they work. Adding more layers—like contacting past sitters—adds steps and possible bias.
One simple possible fix: THS could change it so that both sitters and HOs must leave a review for their last sit before booking their next one. That alone could clear up a lot.
Yes – I was just thinking this. I actually contacted a sitter recently and had to use a roundabout way, as a sitter myself, since this option isn’t available on the site. I can see pros and cons – really, we should rely on reviews, but on the other hand review culture (not just here) is to give a glowing review unless something is really wrong. THS explicitly encourages five-star reviews, which I’m not sure is a good thing. So if you have more explicit questions which you don’t feel you can ask the host it would be a good idea. In other words, I would appreciate the facility but would not expect to overuse it.
(Edited to comply with the Community Rules)
There is an option to tell other sitters about available sits on the TH site. It’s next to the map of an individual sit description, Titled “Know someone who would love this sit?”
In my mind it would be a nightmare discussing other people and their homes and pets behind their backs, online, making available info that could be harvested and used for all kind of stuff. Ofc also possible breach of THS Code of Conduct. Even in a «private» group everything shared online should be considered «public» - you never know who is in the group, knows somebody in the group etc.
Personally I would avoid partnering up with a member that might be a risk for discussing me online.
@Garfield GREAT IDEA! 