Talk:Hospitality exchange

Purpose

I kinda figured a travel topic about home stay networks in general would be a better article than discussions about individual organizations. I moved the content from the three networks that were mentioned so far to this page, and added an introduction about home stay in general.

This has been the general tack we've taken with other articles about individual companies (viz. Discount airlines in Europe), and I figure it makes sense here.

Obviously this is subject to change if people think it was a bad idea. And there's a lot more info that could be added to the page, including costs, requirements, and restrictions for each of the networks. I've never used a home stay network, so I don't really have enough first-hand experience to give more than general suggestions. --(WT-en) Evan 14:35, 22 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Well, I think it makes sense to write one global article about hospitality exchange (much more used term than Home stay network - I dont have enough edit history to know how to change this, but suggest you do that), and then link to separate pages for every organization where much more info can be given. I definitely did not like the idea of having the HC listed only on that page. Then, whenever I would add some info I would have to think how that relates to the other organizations. Better to keep things separate. And yes, I do know what I am doing - I founded the HC and also created and edit the Hospitality Clubs category at dmoz.org ;-) Greetings from Germany! --(WT-en) Veit 05:07 in the morning in Europe, 22 Apr 2004

Mmmm... I disagree. You might want to take a look at the way we've done some other pages, like the aforementioned Discount airlines in Europe. We tend to group together companies and services under a travel topic and discuss the topic in general, with some brief discussion of each service and what makes it special. You can always add information about Hospitality Club to the section of this page dealing with it.

I'd love to see some more opinions on the matter, though. --(WT-en) Evan 00:17, 2 May 2004 (EDT)

Just keep it in one page unless it grows too big - in which case a specific article can be devoted to the topic, with even more information. (WT-en) Guaka 18:39, 4 May 2004 (EDT)

More objective..

Sorted the clubs more alphabetically and tried to take out information about stuff which is given in most clubs. Think the description about the clubs should be basic and like a listing that it easier for people to compare the networks.

sorted by club size, which given the very few entries here is far more useful. At a glance any new member can see which ones are most mature. IF the list grows to a phone-book size, then aplhabetical may be worth persuing.

Hospitality Club deep links

I removed the deep links to the Hospitality Club Web site. I don't think we need to have links to each and every feature within the site; that's the responsibility of the main page there. --(WT-en) Evan 17:37, 4 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Hm, this is exactly the reason why I think it is better to have a separate page about the HC. The site is already so large that some of our features are really worth mentioning, and of course I don't like to see it edited out like you just did after I add something. Soooo - my suggestion, either let us have the separate HC page back so we can add as much info and links as we like, or just be tolerant of us adding more info here as the HC and its sections grow. Also, I noticed that you added quite a lot of deep links on Wikipedia to Wikivoyage pages, so I don't understand why you would remove deep links on your own site.(WT-en) Veit 17:30, 5 Jun 2004 (EDT)

If you'd like to give more information about the Hospitality Club that's useful for travellers, I think there's definitely room for that. Compare the listing for Hospitality exchange#Servas, which has some information about the mechanics of using the network. Could you maybe add more information like that? How do guests and hosts make contact? What are the requirements for guests? Hosts? How do guests find hosts? What's the limit on duration of stay? Is food provided? --(WT-en) Evan 18:51, 5 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Well - I didnt want to blow up the page talking too much about the HC, thats why I linked to the most relevant and informative sections. And there are 5 deeplinks only. All the questions you asked are answered in detail in the Tour, the Rules or the Forum or can be asked directly in the Chat. It makes more sense to link than to answer them here in detail - unless you want to have a page with 4/5 of info about the HC and the rest about the idea or other orgs. BTW, you didnt answer my question: why such a fuzz about those 5 relevant deeplinks here, but hundreds of deeplinks to Wikivoyage on Wikipedia? (WT-en) Veit 02:14, 8 Jun 2004 (EDT)

I think you have it backwards; there are many links to Wikipedia on Wikivoyage, not the other way around. The deep links to Wikipedia are for a different type of article and a different kind of reference.

Well, I found lots and lots of external links on Wikipedia to Wikivoyage. I dont understand why you would be saying this is not a fact?

Thanks for the great info on the way HC works, by the way. It's very helpful and just what we need.

Valmi added that :-)

I think there may be some ways that HC and Wikivoyage can cooperate. You may want to look at Project:Fellow Traveller Expedition for some ideas on how we do this. Our list of related projects may be a good starting point, and Project:Cooperating with Hospitality Club may be a good article to start. See Project:Cooperating with OpenGuides and Project:Cooperating with Wikipedia for examples.

Sure, I am getting tired of playing children's games here. I set up a HC article in the first place, you decided you would throw them all together on one page. Fine. My warning that probably later adding info (and of course LINKS) to the HC will be edited out since the page would look unbalanced, was overheard. And now just that is happening. But I also don't like my work getting deleted, so I am putting those links back. I think they are helpful and point the traveler to the right section on our site. With the same argument "it's enough to link to the main page only" I could start removing all deeplinks on Wikipedia to Wikivoyage and just leave one to your main page in Travel Guides. Deeplinking makes sense sometimes.

I took out the request to add names to the list of Project:Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club, as that's not really travel information and doesn't belong in the travel guide, and we don't normally link to pages in different namespaces from the guides. I'll add it to this talk page, though. --(WT-en) Evan 12:53, 8 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Fine. I put a link behind "members" to this page so if people wanna see real members they can do it right here on Wikivoyage.(WT-en) Veit 04:34, 9 Jun 2004 (EDT)

List of Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club

I moved this meta-information out of the article:

If you are a Hospitality Club member and Wikivoyager, add your username to this list.

The list is now at Project:Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club. --(WT-en) Evan 12:53, 8 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Continuous deletions

I am tired of having my contributions deleted on Wikivoyage. Nobody is really answering to my arguments, just reverting my edits. Too bad. I just added them to my personal page here.(WT-en) Veit 01:33, 13 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club

There's a talk sub-page at Talk:Hospitality exchange/Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club. --(WT-en) Evan 11:53, 30 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Re: More objective

Hello 80.133.*. Considering your agenda and history on Wikipedia, I'm sure you won't be too surprised that I pass your last edit through tight scrutiny.

First of all, I don't understand why you say it is objectively more interesting to tavellers to have the networks classified alphabetically, so I put them back in members count order, which seems to me as a more objective measure of how the different networks may seem attractive to a traveller that knows little else about them.

This will also, interestingly, allow us to see what you edited. So as a matter of fact it seems you have only changed the HC and CS entries.

HC: rm and no money is involved - guests and host do not pay each other, agreed, it's the same on all nets listed here; add Europe and Asia is well represented, that's bullshit, HC has only 6.2% of their membership in Asia; add Through his technical structure is the club is based, I just don't get it what this void phrase means; rm who believe that by bringing people together they can increase intercultural understanding and peace, CouchSurfing themselves would disagree because they make a big point that it's the main difference between them and HC!

CS: add non-profit, OK if you want; change date founded from 2004 to 2003, you'll have to have it changed on CS website first of all! change member count to almost 6000, that seems pretty rough an estimation to me considering the count on CS website is 5235; change most of them in North America to Noth America is well represented, both are true but the first is more specific, as 56.2% CS members are from Canada/USA according to their website; rm but becoming a "verified member" costs a one-time US$25 fee, I don't see why you removed it since CS is the only website to offer that, changing to more NPOV but members may opt to become "verified members" for US$25; change encouraged for welcomed, if you so please; all the rest you added I have no problem with.

One final note: if you plan on going on with that kind of edits, may I suggest you sign up and get a username on both Wikipedia and Wikivoyage?

--(WT-en) Valmi 12:39, 21 Oct 2004 (EDT)

I agree with Valmi. -- (WT-en) Colin 12:52, 21 Oct 2004 (EDT)

I agree.

"who believe that by bringing people together they can increase intercultural understanding and peace, CouchSurfing themselves would disagree because they make a big point that it's the main difference between them and HC!" disagree! from the cs webpage: "[...] official mission statement as: "To internationally network people and places, create educational exchanges, raise collective consciousness, spread tolerance, and facilitate cultural understanding." [...]"

From Fenton, founder and director or CS: "CouchSurfing is all about an inward journey. It's all about self-development [...]". He keeps repeating that everywhere. --(WT-en) Valmi 14:33, 22 Oct 2004 (EDT)

I can't tell what you are trying to say here. But if you are trying to say CS would like to promote understanding or whatever, just add it to the article in the CS section. However, I would note that despite this promotion being their "mission statement", they do not emphasize it much -- especially contrasted with HC where cultural understanding is the primary intention announced loudly, obnoxiously, and often. -- (WT-en) Colin 14:37, 22 Oct 2004 (EDT)

Stop! I just wanted to say that it is the intention from all networks. And I think I don't have to tell you how HC is promoting in the media as "free accommodation worldwide" to open more people with the idea, get them in and than make them to find out by themselves that there is much more behind.. both networks do this in their own way, don't judge which one is better..

And what I am saying is that there are more than just two networks. I don't care if you add to the text of CS. I DO care that you don't label all seven networks with the same statement. Let's make this page open for ALL hospitality networks, not just ones who's purpose is cultural exchange. -- (WT-en) Colin 19:14, 22 Oct 2004 (EDT)

I would care. Without saying that HC is better than CS, they don't have the same goal. HC seeks world peace through cultural understanding, whereas CS seeks personnal achievement and growth. And all the other networks have different goals, sometimes similar (HC vs. TH), sometimes very different (GFL vs. CS or HC; PS vs. all other, etc). --(WT-en) Valmi 23:09, 22 Oct 2004 (EDT)

Veto! The second change was right! You can't deny that all networks are connected with this idea and they all know what their cultural exchange can bring. Otherwise you could not believe in the idea of hospitality exchange.

Valmi, tell me: How can you seek world peace with a "HC over all" and censoring mentality? This has a really bitter taste.. alex

Uh? --(WT-en) Valmi 21:06, 23 Oct 2004 (EDT)

Documenting last edit

I don't know whether I should again document my modifications to 80.133.*'s changes? Let me do it anyway...

• rm Germany is especially well represented: Germany is not even the best represented country, far from it. Compare to Lithuania, where the membership rate reaches 0.223o/oo. Germany = 0.100o/oo.
• readd The sole condition to become a member is to provide the administrators with one's real name and address, so as to prove that one is a real individual.: Was that supposed to be false or ambiguous in your opinion?
• readd An internal message-sending mechanism is then used: Same question...
• edt TravelHoo is the oldest webbased hospitality exchange organization: TH has been operating since 1997. Hospex has operated from 1991. What, may I ask, the fuck?
• edt hospitality exchange organization (legal USA-based non-profit structure): Was that supplementing, removing false statement, or updating? You kept exactly the same words, except you added some to make the sentence ugly and cumbersome...
• edt Noth Amrica is especially well represented: I think I found an ultimate solution, I gavew the very objective, undiscussable member count for North America, and the member count for the rest of the World, plus the country count. You cannot get more NPOV. You may find, as I suppose from your edits that you are a CS advocate, find that this suggests a bit too explicitely that a majority of CS members are North-Americans, but to be totally honest, the majority (57+%) of CS members are North-Americans...

Besides, please be more careful with your spelling... (I don't suppose that Noth Amrica was due to "ignorance".) --(WT-en) Valmi 00:25, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Noth Amrica was probably a typo, just like your gavew in the above. While it's nice to get it right the first time, mispelled info is better than no info. (WT-en) Hypatia 00:39, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Well, considering that a) it was in the real article, b) it was only moving the word around the sentence, c) there was no such thing as a new info in this sentence, and d) as you say it it was only a typo, not a mistake made because of a bad control on English, I maintain my point of view that 80.133.* should have taken five seconds to reread its contribution before posting. --(WT-en) Valmi 10:07, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Thanks. I didn't jump all over the last CS-biased edit because I didn't have the time for fact-checking. It helps me for you to write this stuff down. -- (WT-en) Colin 00:42, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

The sole condition to become a member is to provide the administrators with one's real name and address, so as to prove that one is a real individual. Providing a name and an address is not a prove that one is a real individual. HopsitalityClub doesn't do more than other networks. Your sentence is illusion.

An internal message-sending mechanism is then used: Same question... Privacy is a sensitive issue and there is a big difference if it's done manually (volunteers) or automatically.. It's promoted from HospitalityClub as a big feature, so be proud of it and let the people decide. Don't try to write it positive ("thanks to the volunteers"), just write the facts.

You take out that at HospitalityClub 8000 members come from Germany (20%+) and you add at CouchSurfing the 'ultimate solution' with more numbers and details? Being objective, you turn everything what is ambiguous to HospitalityClub advantages. Nothing surprisingly new due you are a HospitalityClub 'main' volunteer.

• Providing a name and an address is not a prove that one is a real individual. I don't know if it is a proof, but the word as here indicates a goal.
• Privacy is a sensitive issue and there is a big difference if it's done manually (volunteers) or automatically.. It's promoted from HospitalityClub as a big feature, so be proud of it and let the people decide. Yeah, exactly. So why did you remove this phrase exactly, I still don't get it. Is it false or ambiguous that we use an "internal message-sending mechanism"?
• And by the way, I don't know if you are aware that there is an edit history of wikis, but you know, it's useless trying to make me look like an arsehole on the talk page, as people know that I had not removed your addition about manual checking of messages by volunteers.
• You take out that at HospitalityClub 8000 members come from Germany (20%+)... Well OK then, if you feel like there would be a point in writing that HC has 8000 members from Germany and 25000 members in 160 other countries, just do that. Why not? There's a small difference between 20% and almost 60%, but whatever. I hope at least you have fun.
• Nothing surprisingly new due you are a HospitalityClub 'main' volunteer. Oh wow, now you got me, hell, I'm shut, aren't I? Look buster, everybody knows that I'm one the important volunteers in HC. If you feel that this is very important, maybe you'd like to tell us who you are, but don't worry: nobody here cares. --(WT-en) Valmi 10:12, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

doh! :-) just keep cool, don't insult, stay friendly and don't show that much about yourself.. like you said, nobody here cares.

Well, you do care, since you take some time that could be sed into usefully contributing to WT articles to remind people of my involvement in HC. So let's put it clearly, once and for all, I'm a very involved Hospitality Club volunteer with a strong feelings against Couch Surfing. And I didn't insult you. --(WT-en) Valmi 12:16, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Good. I see all networks equal and want to have a equivalent wiki hospitality exchange section for all networks. There isn't a better or a worse network, yet. Just people who think that they are better than others.. but that's another topic. xxx

legal structures

hospitality exchange organization (legal USA-based non-profit structure): Was that supplementing, removing false statement, or updating? You kept exactly the same words, except you added some to make the sentence ugly and cumbersome... Is it important to highlight the USA-based non-profit structure at Couchsurfing? Should it be add in () or in the sentence. Should information be added to other Hospitality Networks? For example that other networks have no legal structure at all (HospitalityClub)? Or is this information not significant at all? xxx

Well, I suppose CS people think it is significant, because they mention it all over their website. But sure, feel free to add the information European-based organization with no legal structure as of yet to the HC presentation if you think this is interesting! --(WT-en) Valmi 10:12, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

I mean, that's a wiki! If there's something of any interest whatsoever that is not false or fallacious that you would like to add, no need to make a fuss about it: just add it!! --(WT-en) Valmi 10:14, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Thanks for the answer Valmi. But it wasn't just directed to you, even I knew you would be the first one pinpointing. It was a general question and a attempt to bring a standard valuation and description to the whole section. Don't see it as pro or con for either HospitalityClub nor Couchsurfing or any other Project. Your edit history shows that you are not interessted in any other project than HospitalityClub apart from when there is more information added to them. xxx

Well, I don't reckon it was directed to anybody as a matter of fact, that's just a wiki-question... I think Wikivoyage is unfortunately a pretty dead project (although I did contribute to other articles than this one), but please have a look at my edit histories on various wikis, specially Wikipedia, before stating that I'm on an agenda. Besides, no anonymous kisses please. --(WT-en) Valmi 12:15, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Like you said before, nobody here cares who I am. Your aganda at the wiki Hospitality exchange section is clear - nothing else matters in this section.

Sentence removal by 80.133.*

So 80.133.*.* removed this sentence

The sole condition to become a member is to provide the administrators with one's real name and address,
so as to prove that one is a real individual

I don't see a good reason for this sentence to be removed. It should be clear to anyone that, since only a name and address are being provided, HC is trusting this info. So I don't see this as a deceptive claim. The sentence does not imply that real, serious validation is going on. Is there any other objection to the sentence? -- (WT-en) Colin 15:29, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

This sentence is confusing for people. HopsitalityClub doesn't do more than other networks. So you can argue that I have to add it to every network - false. This would make the whole section to large and complex. It would make it difficult to become a good overview abut the different networks. Therefore it should a good general text and the information about the networks should be reduced to what makes them different to the others. In this case: most networks have a normal sign up procedure, Servas does his interview, at CouchSurfing you can become a "verified member" after signing up.. any other supplementary information? xxx

Okay. So it sounds to me like Servas does additional verification steps. And CS provides a facility for paying money to gain an additional level of validation above the mere baseline. Do I understand this right?

So... assuming I got that part right. It would be nice to clarify the language a bit in CS to explain better what being a verified member entails and what validation steps are provided by CS to ensure the payee is valid. And point out how that is a benefit in terms of security. Does CS provide a way for you choose a validated host, for example? Or a way for hosts to require validated travellers? It'd be nice to mention that.

As for the disputed sentence which you say is sort of a baseline of validation for all the exchanges.... I think it'd be better to go ahead and add a sentence like that to each network which provides the minimum level. This way we are reminding the reader that the network provides only that level and no better. (For CS, it should fully explain the base level and the verified level).

Does this work okay for everyone? -- (WT-en) Colin 20:02, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

Sounds good, specially since there are nuances. I'll make that right now. --(WT-en) Valmi 20:12, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

So I clarified the text on HC, and CS verification processus as well. In CS, new profiles are not reviewd and providing an address is not necessary, unlike what had just been written, but I didn't write it to avoid 80.133 creating more trouble. By the way, keep in mind that HC is the only major online organisation that review applications for membership, and CS in the only one as of yet that offers a verification process–there is more than just CS and HC in the world. The interview process in Servas was already documented in the article.

Parallel request: 80.133, would you mind please signing with --~~~~? This makes talkpages more readable, let people know who wrote, give them a sense of when, and is common wiki courtesy. If I was trying to accuse you of having an agenda, I may add a question as of whether you have any experience of wiki editing except for this article. --(WT-en) Valmi 20:32, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

By the way, keep in mind that HC is the only major online organisation that review applications for membership How is this done? Checking if it looks right? That isn't more than looking if it is complet - not matter if with correct or fales information.

Let point this all out and than change all networks to a line. So we don't have to edit after every estimation.. xxx

I'm confused. In your last reversion of the article you wrote "lets first the talk finished and than change" but you haven't actually commented on my proposal. Please comment soon so that we can get on with this! -- (WT-en) Colin 02:25, 6 Dec 2004 (EST)

// Colin, with due respect but I don't have the time to maunder in circles. Time would also be better used to make research to the whole subject instead of intensify for one lobby - I asked already for supplementary information and other repeated this as well with saying there is more than HC and CS. So, let's not distract from the main thing, without linguistic plays.. :)

The minimum level is a basic sign up process, which every internet user does dozen of times and there is 'always' 'real data' claimed and there is no need to remind people on details like that.

There is the same right for every network and also for the aim of Wikivoyage to be a comprehensive guide. Let's collect facts and than bring this in a standard form/sentence. This can be written on the start and the differences of each network can be pointed extra in the description of the network or added to each network in the same form. This will make it easier to get a good overview about all networks and not reading for ages like in a fairy tale. I (started with the sign up) and marked the differences to the other networks. Supplementary information is appreciated. \\ xxx

2.1 Bootsnall basic sign up, email verification, no check if information personal/basic data is right

2.2 CouchSurfing Project basic sign up, email verification, no check if information personal/basic data is right. possibility to start a verification process (via credit card payment and snail mail)

2.3 GlobalFreeloaders basic sign up, email verification, no check if information personal/basic data is right

2.4 Hospitality Club basic sign up, no email verification, check if personal/basic data is given

2.5 Pasporta Servo (http://www.tejo.org/ps/ps_lingv/ps_inf_en.htm) basic sign up, email verification, no check if information personal/basic data is right. Requires basic Esperanto speaking ability (a goal which can generally be reached within a couple of months). You must purchase the host list or sign up as a host to use the service. Pasporto Servo has existed since 1974 and has 1364 hosts in 89 countries.

2.6 Servas real interview/meeting with a volunteer before joining (for the use of travelling every year)

2.7 TravelHoo basic sign up, email verification, no check if information personal/basic data is right

This information is wrong. Try again. Also, please be curteous: format your interventions on talkpages properly and sign them with --~~~~. --(WT-en) Valmi 12:25, 6 Dec 2004 (EST)

Could you be specific about what is wrong? Based on the HC website, it appears HC validates email addresses, but since I'm not a member, I can't say that for sure. Is this correct? -- (WT-en) Colin 13:32, 6 Dec 2004 (EST)

I'm not sure what HC does with email addresses. Personal informations are checked more thoroughly, though. Those being security matters, I cannot really tell more than what's written on the website, as not to give clues how the verification process can be worked around–sinve it's obviously far from perfect–but it's a little more, right, than just checking if the information is provided.

CS, and most other online organisations, ask for a name but not for an address, and profiles are not reviewed, so one could in fact write anything. --(WT-en) Valmi 17:57, 6 Dec 2004 (EST)

// Nice that there is still more supplementary information coming, not only mourn about layout peanuts. :-) Please, show your respectability with more than being able to sign up for a wiki account and know how to sign. I said already I don't have the time to maunder in circles and won't response to stuff like this anymore.. :-)

First you consider my information as false and now you don't know. Valmi, we talked already about the fairy tale thingy. So stay to the facts, we need no estimations. I also do not want to talk about security matters and details here (for security reasons), so don't let us go so far. It is pretty easy to find the sign up stuff out. Use equivocal information not for the network advantage but for user advantage, one of the idea most important fragment. Fact is that you can sign up at HospitalityClub with false information, like at any other network (just use a random name found at google instead a few senseless signs - just try it and you can even live in Chicago / France). What you said is a mystification to make people believe and irritate about a 'security' system which doesn’t exist.. why? Bad people try anyway and they get trough, and some good people might trust in what you write - dangerous trust. The first real verification is the passport id system, which is good and 'promoted' on/from HospitalityClub. \\ xxx

Note to all: I shall take my wikivacation earlier than what was planned... Away until 29 December. --(WT-en) Valmi 11:45, 7 Dec 2004 (EST)

Network Description Layout

I would prefer to arrange it in three segments. 1. History, Description what they are from thier homepage. 2. different requirements for participation, restrictions for guests and member number and geographical spreading (see discussion above) 3. don't know. Proposals? Don't forget the discussion above.. ;-) xxx

You'll recall I have strong feelings about labeling all networks as promoting culture exchange as a goal? There is little point in reorganizing stuff when you have not acheived consensus on the alterations you have already proposed (and seem determined to shove into the article no matter the opinions of others). I'd like to help you acheive specific changes to the article to correct errors, but you really need to help me to help you. You need to acheive consensus before making disputed changes. This wiki is not governed by the rule of "whoever makes changes fastest wins." Unless you can acheive consenus, I will revert this back at some random point in the future. So rather than force your changes in (which is doomed to failure), how about we talk about it instead first. -- (WT-en) Colin 14:10, 7 Dec 2004 (EST)

I didn't label all networks as promoting culture exchange as a goal. But they are all, if wanted or not, connected with this. Exchange from different cultures and people can strengthen intercultural understanding and reduce prejudices and intolerance. Right? That can't be a goal from any network, it's just a effect what happen through it..

Don't change the version back, build up on the version I've got now due you had only this sentence to reject how it looks like. xxx

Hey anon, I'm totally disgusted by the amount of spurious generalisation you have introduced in your last version. Let this be my last comment until 29 December... --(WT-en) Valmi 15:22, 7 Dec 2004 (EST)

This section is about the Hospitality Exchange, not mainly about two or three networks. An example: Compare the some other pages, like the aforementioned Discount airlines in Europe. Shall I start writing about the whole booking, checking, boarding and flying process with Easyjet just because you only need you passport as ticket and with Ryanair passport and booking id?

It's for people to get an overview about the subject and how the whole thing works without going in details. HospitalityClub didn't invented the wheel, so there is no reason for a special treatment in the description how hospitality exchange works or to explain it for every network again - basically they all have the same procedure and that is what can be written in the introduction. Differences and features can be added at the networks describtion (still asking how the general format and matters should look like).

There was now double information present, that is because I wanted to know more about the matters and layout for the networks itself. So in my opinion you slimed to much @ Evan. xxx

Home exchange

This was copied from the now-redirected Home exchange article and may be valuable for data mining:

Home exchange or house swapping is a vacation alternative where one allows someone else to stay in their home while they stay in theirs. During a home exchange the parties swap their homes at a time that is convenient to both parties. A house swap may also include an automobile exchange.

Home exchanging has numerous advantages, including significant savings on hotel costs since neither has to pay for lodging. Additional savings can be had when an automobile is also exchanged. And who doesn't prefer a spacious house to a one-room hotel? Whether for a vacation, or a longer term sabbatical, a home exchange allows one to experience a vacation living like a native.

Unless you are exchanging a 5-star villa in the Caribbean or an apartment facing Central Park, finding a home exchange requires a little bit of effort and time.

The Internet has numerous websites that provide home exchange listings across the globe. You can determine how up-to-date the listings are by reviewing the proposed exchange dates. Home exchange websites provide a mechanism by which you can get in touch with other people interested in swapping homes. However, you are responsible for your own exchange arrangements.

To increase your chances of concluding an exchange you should post your home swap offer on several home exchange sites. It is recommended to post your home exchange offer several months before the dates you want to exchange homes. Compile an enticing exchange offer that includes details about your home, yourself, your destination and proposed dates. Periodically check home exchange sites for new home swap listings. And don’t forget to contact new members as soon as possible before they are able to conclude an exchange.

Once you’ve made contact and your potential exchange partner confirms their interest in your home, get to know them better by exchanging e-mails and agreeing to speak on the telephone. To reassure yourself and your exchange partner you should ask for and offer to provide references.

Clean and tidy your home before your exchange. You may also want to fix that leaky faucet that you’ve been meaning to get to for several months now.

Create a guestbook that provides information on using your appliances, local information (e.g. hospital, restaurants, grocery stores, transportation), and contact numbers (e.g. family member or friends, dentist, car garage).

• 1st Home Exchange / Vacation House Swap Lists vacation home exchange / house swap listings across the globe. Website is available in several languages.

• Intervac One of the early clubs, still produces a hard-copy catalog in addition to listings on its website

• Easy Home Exchange A top rated home exchange community offering free membership and very detailed home listings. Large selection of Home Exchanges available worldwide.

Couchsurfing

Maybe we should be so specific in the article saying that CS doesn't exist anymore, since I found the mail we received rather unclear as to the continuation. Sure the database was lost, but there is enough ambiguity in the mail to let think it will not just end like that.

I based it on surfing to http://www.couchsurfing.com and reading what was posted there. Maybe he still had hope when he wrong the mail, but the current status says it's hopeless. -- (WT-en) Colin 17:15, 30 June 2006 (EDT)

Just to bring this thread up to date, I visited CouchSurfing.com today, and it appears to up and running again. The main Hospitality exchange article says that they were able to recover from their computer failure. (WT-en) JimDeLaHunt

Someone just added a link to Couchsurfing.com to the Victoria (British Columbia) article, under Sleep: Budget. It's certainly a budget sleeping alternative, but not specific to Victoria. Is there a place for global hospitality exchange services in specific destination articles? (WT-en) JimDeLaHunt 15:30, 21 December 2006 (EST)

TravelHoo

TravelHoo [1] seems to be closed down or no longer working with hospitality exchange, judging by the web site. Should the section be deleted from the article? (WT-en) Riggwelter 05:41, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

Bias information

Looking at the main page actually made me feel uncomfortable as it seems mostly like a fight between HC and CS. Instead of learning about hospitality exchange, I left with a bad taste in my mouth.

It feels as if sentences like "Unlike the next largest hospitality exchange, hospitalityclub.org, couchsurfing is much more focused on "social networking", and members organize many events, viewable in a database on the website" are very bias, and even insulting, especially since the next section shows that HC does have events as well.

CS isn't the only ones displaying this sort of behavior, as a brief read of this page shows this fight has been going on for a while between the two sites. Is there any way someone less bias could edit this page to be less like reading the arguments of a (soon to be divorced) married couple? -(WT-en) Kayla 03:57, 13 March 2010 (EST)

Expectations

As of now, the article seems to look at hospitality exchange as just another way to get a bed and perhaps board cheaply. "The opportunity to make a personal connection" is described as an additional bonus, while my understanding is that it is the main point, at least from the hosts' point of view.

I think the article desperately needs a section on what is expected from host and guest, together with tips on what you can do to get a good experience, with both the guest and the host being happy about the encounter. Just using the "couch" will surely disappoint a host who is on the network to get to know other people and/or cultures.

If some networks just provide a free bed, the differences should be discussed in the general section, with a short note for individual networks. The present "focused on 'social networking', and members organize many events" (about CS) does not warn clearly enough about the expectations on a visit.

--LPfi (talk) 08:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Really necessary to mention AirBnB here?

I feel AirBnB is like Booking.com, hotel rooms and apartments, and in this case just by private people. It is really nothing to compare with Couchsurfing, WarmShowers or BeWelcome. It is a commercial platform and often criticised for its business model.

I would therefore rather remove it from this article. Any objections?

Cheers Ceever (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

It is an important topic for travellers, so removing would reduce the usefulness of Wikivoyage for them. Also, you'd then want to remove the niche market versions - 9falts, misterbnb, noirbnb, etc., reducing the usefulness of the article further. Ground Zero (talk) 17:42, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

It is just not a Hospitality exchange. If I run a hotel privately, naming it Hospitality exchange does not change its meaning. Yes, some hosts might be very helpful to guest (as are many hotels), other feel run like hotels. Hospitality for money is not hospitality, it is a business.

Yes, the information is useful for travelers - even though I doubt that anyone would not know AirBnB - but it is simply the wrong page. Otherwise, we have to add Booking.com, Agoda, and others as well, because also there many private people offer rooms.

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 20:39, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

In the intro paragraph, we are told "The stay can be for free, in exchange for monetary compensation, ...", which does describe Airbnb, and as Booking and others move into that markets, others too. This blurring of lines between platforms is problematic. We should look at this on conjunction with Aggregators and ensure consistency and thorough cross-referencing. Ground Zero (talk) 07:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Eh? "Free in exchange for compensation"? That's a contradiction in terms! Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, here is the full sentence from the article, which makes sense:

"The stay can be for free, in exchange for monetary compensation, in exchange for a stay at the guest's property either simultaneously or at another time (home swapping), or in exchange for help on the host's property."

Ground Zero (talk) 08:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

If it's in exchange for monetary compensation, I don't think that's hospitality at all, just business, and I don't think it should be included in this article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I feel strongly that Airbnb should be covered in some travel topic article. I do find this article a little odd, because I think of Airbnb as a very different kind of service from a home swap and pretty different from Couchsurfing. It might be reasonable to restructure how we cover these services. But Airbnb and similar services need to be covered somewhere – if we remove them from this article we need to put them somewhere else. —Granger (talk · contribs) 08:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Most definitely. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:36, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I'd added AirBnB-like lodging for hire to Wikivoyage:Requested articles here only to be reverted here. Renting rooms (or entire flats) for profit is not the same concept as hospitality exchange and should be dealt with in a separate article; until this is done, the request should not have been removed from WV:RA. This is a topic of importance and its absence was noted two years ago. Nothing has been fixed since then. K7L (talk) 13:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm happy to help with creating a new article, but I'm a little uncertain how to go about it in this case.

It seems to me there are four types of listings in this article: (1) Airbnb-like services where you pay to stay in a room, a flat, or similar that's generally operated by an individual person, probably as a side hustle, rather than a real business like a hotel or hostel; (2) Couchsurfing-like services where you stay in someone's place for free, often as a kind of cultural exchange or as part of a community that's geographically dispersed; (3) work-for-lodging programs where you stay in someone's house in exchange for doing some kind of work for them; and (4) home exchanges where you stay in someone else's house while they stay in your house. There's some amount of overlap between these categories; Staydu.com, for example, seems like it could fall into types 1, 2, and 3 based on the description. Type 1 may also overlap with Vacation rentals.

Type 4 is already covered in the article Home exchange, so those listings should just be moved there. The other three types are currently covered in one article (this one). If we want to split them up, how should we do it? Should they get three separate articles, or should we keep types 2 and 3 together in one article? Assuming type 1 gets its own article, what should that article be called? —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:07, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

As User:Ceever notes, Booking.com, which is primarily a hotels site, also lists apartments for rent like Airbnb. I stayed in one in Sibiu two nights ago. It kind of irritates me - sometimes I want a hotel, and have to wade through lists of apartments to find one. But nonetheless, since hotels and apartments are bring co-mingled, we can't distinguish them between articles. The remaining distinction seems to be "for pay" and "not for pay". Ground Zero (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

If a vendor fits into more than one category (for instance, if AirBnB were to list both vacation rentals of entire apartments and bed and breakfast-style rentals of individual rooms where the owner is in the house) then create both articles and list the multiple-category vendor in each of the relevant articles. To change our topic structure to fuse entire disparate categories together because the same one vendor may be present in different segments is arbitrary and only makes things awkward. Renting a room for money is not renting an entire house or apartment for money is not hospitality exchange (exchanging lodging for lodging), which is not free lodging, which is not employer-provided migrant worker housing. Different topic, different article. K7L (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Structure of listings

I don't really like the structure of the listings in this article, and I don't think the recent edits have made it better. The summary tables present very little useful information, and what little information they do add can be incorporated into the text above.

Moreover, using subsections for each listing looks like it's simple the wrong way to present this information. It makes the page pretty hard to navigate, and it doesn't match WV style. I think it ought to be converted to bullet lists, and each listing given a format that's similar to standard WV listing types in order to present the information succinctly and consistently.

So for instance, instead of

====Couchsurfing====

'''# of active hosts: 400,000<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CouchSurfing</ref>'''

[http://www.couchsurfing.com Couchsurfing] was founded in January 2004 after computer programmer Casey Fenton found a cheap flight to Iceland but did not have a place to stay. He emailed students at the local university and received an overwhelming number of offers for free accommodation. The limited membership is free—members can pay a fee to be "verified" or to send unlimited couch requests (see [[#Summary|below]]). Unlike Airbnb, monetary exchange between the host and guest is forbidden; stays are completely free, although guests are encouraged to bring a gift, buy a drink, and/or cook a meal for their hosts. Guests can either message individual potential hosts with whom they want to stay or they can post their upcoming trips publicly and receive offers of accommodation from potential hosts. Members fill out a detailed profile that includes their interests and pictures. Guests and hosts can write references for each other. Members can also use the mobile app to "hangout" with each other. Members can also set up events and many major cities have regular member meetings. The site has been criticized for its term of use, which allows Couchsurfing to use the data in the profiles of its members.

how about

• Couchsurfing. 400,000 listings. Ad-driven. Couchsurfing was founded in January 2004 after computer programmer Casey Fenton found a cheap flight to Iceland but did not have a place to stay. He emailed students at the local university and received an overwhelming number of offers for free accommodation. The limited membership is free—members can pay a fee to be "verified" or to send unlimited couch requests. Unlike Airbnb, monetary exchange between the host and guest is forbidden; stays are completely free, although guests are encouraged to bring a gift, buy a drink, and/or cook a meal for their hosts. Guests can either message individual potential hosts with whom they want to stay or they can post their upcoming trips publicly and receive offers of accommodation from potential hosts. Members fill out a detailed profile that includes their interests and pictures. Guests and hosts can write references for each other. Members can also use the mobile app to "hangout" with each other. Members can also set up events and many major cities have regular member meetings. The site has been criticized for its term of use, which allows Couchsurfing to use the data in the profiles of its members. Limited membership free; premium €54/US$60.

I think that will look substantially better as a list of items.

I question whether any of the information in the summary table needs to be added/moved to the main text. (Almost every site requires registration, and that shouldn't be surprising to anyone who's on the Internet. The business model doesn't seem useful; I would bet travellers who decide which platform to use based on the business model are in the minority, and they can research that themselves.) However, if there is any info worth keeping, it can be moved into the body text as I demonstrated. --Bigpeteb (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't mind the listing proposal. However, what is important to the traveler or not, should lie in the responsibility of the traveler. Some people just do not want to support commercially driven businesses. So, this information is relevant to them. I put some work in collecting this information - why lose it? Also, it does not really take much space mentioning something like: the platform is financed by advertisement and agent fees. This is like discussing whether there is too much text or not, e.g. Couchsurfing is too much blablabla in my opinion. Cheers Ceever (talk) 19:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

No no no. That's not how WV works.

"I put some work in collecting this information - why lose it?"

The decision to keep or remove information from articles must be made according to WV's policies and with consensus from users, regardless of how much effort anyone put in to create that content.

"Some people just do not want to support commercially driven businesses. So, this information is relevant to them."

I'm sure that some such people exist, but how many are there? How common is this? Is it particular to hospitality exchange? If so, perhaps you could explain what the correlation is (and maybe even add a description of this aspect to the article). However, as far as I know, users who pay attention to how their chosen search/booking site makes its revenue are in the vast minority.

If we were talking about our article on Responsible travel, for example, then it might be a very logical step to talk about revenue sources or business models. However, I don't see how it's relevant to hospitality exchange.

"However, what is important to the traveler or not, should lie in the responsibility of the traveler."

Yes, the traveller comes first, but that does not mean every traveller. WV's goals and non-goals have to be taken into account first. WV is not the yellow pages or a web directory or an encyclopedia. Saying "the traveller comes first" cannot be used to justify cluttering up an article with factoids just because one traveller might find them useful, when hundreds of other travellers would find the information a nuisance. It's particularly important to strike a balance on what information to include in each listing, because while it's easy for readers to simply scroll past a section that doesn't interest them, separating out wanted and unwanted details while reading each and every listing can be quite burdensome.

That these "summary tables" split the article in half, causing each entry to be listed twice, is a major red flag for me that this is not the best way to present information. That it bears a strong similarity to Wikipedia lists like w:List of virtual communities with more than 1 million users or w:List of social networking websites is another red flag, since WP's goals and content and formatting are very deliberately different from Wikipedia's. --Bigpeteb (talk) 20:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I am very glad that I can read things here that do not interest the majority of travellers. We might not need to cater to every traveller, but when we can serve important minorities without much trouble (as here, where the information already has been collected, if we find a good way to present it), we should serve them. I for one care about the business model, and I think the communities behind some of these services also do. I try not to comment the table, as I seldom appreciate tables in Wikipedia articles, so my viewpoint is skewed from the onset. --LPfi (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Reformatting the listings as proposed sounds like a good idea to me. As for the tables, they seem harmless to me but I have no strong feelings about them. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I do not say we should keep the tables, just that the business model is relevant information. It can easily be added to the listing, where it is not already described. --LPfi (talk) 09:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree with LPfi, information is information, and what is relevant has to be decided by the traveller. To understand how things are run and to make a sustainable decision is similar to preventing information on WV that leads to illegal behaviour. The traveller should be able to make a morally correct decision. If you just say, couchsurfing has hosts and bewelcome has host, it is just not enough. If you add that couchsurfing drives a business model that make money from peoples goodwill, then maybe it is more useful to the traveller that maybe will understand that such business models lead to a decline in personal experience during hospitality exchange and in the end is not much different from a hotel stay. Some people might not want to support such things, other might want to. Let them decide with the information we have in this article.

Hence, as long as we keep the information, I am happy about a restructuring. Ceever (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Workaway

Hi all

I wanted to raise an issue with this article.

I have become increasingly sceptical of Workaway and such in the recent years. While I believe they can be a great way to learn a language and meet interesting locals, many offerors (if not an overwhelming portion) are misusing the platform for cheap labour and to circumvent labour laws for their businesses. I often see places where they expect 20-25 hr of work a week and all you get is a place to sleep, which is far beyond the minimum wage in Europe. Many are ordinary businesses or au-pair positions, and only a few really qualify for a sustainability or volunteering interpretation.

I would therefore tend to move these out of the Hospitality exchange into a more foreign work specific article, with less emphasis on the travel nature of these things. I mean, we have "work" as a subsection in our articles, so it's fine to also have such platforms mentioned. However, we should be conscious about mistreatment and illegality of things and make the traveller aware of these difficulties.

What's your opinion on this?

Many thanks, Ceever (talk) 11:18, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

It seems to me, you know what you're talking about and we should defer to you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The mentioned 5 hr/day approaches a full-time job, and would normally pay much more than food and a bed; it cannot be seen as "hospitality" exchange. As there is no real salary, perhaps Volunteer travel would be a better context, as that seems what this (and its competitor) seems to be about. I notice they are already listed in Volunteer travel#Index sites for volunteer jobs. –LPfi (talk) 16:04, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

–LPfi (talk) 16:04, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Perfect, Volunteer travel looks like the right place. I will move it there and also stress the critical points of this topic. Many thanks 👍 Ceever (talk) 12:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

"Homestay" in dedicated apartments

The name "homestay" suggests that you live in the home of your host or interact with them as if you were (such as staying in a guesthouse in the yard and chatting with them in the garden). However, it also seems this article covers apartments rented commercially for short stays with no interaction with the host (other than asking for directions etc.) and the host possibly living in the other end of the city. These are often in a legally grey area, using the pretext of homestay to avoid legislation and taxes on accommodation businesses.

As the commercially acquired apartments of this type are rented through the same networks (and there are many borderline cases), they probably need to be covered in this article. However, I don't see us doing that. I am not sure about the terminology, but I assume we at least need a paragraph in the lead and some discussion in Understand.

–LPfi (talk) 09:26, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't exclude them. Even Booking.com is a good place sometimes to find host-catered places, e.g. in the Balkans.

However, I would definitely stress the fact that one cannot really distinguish between genuine homestays and commercial, grey area offers. Nevertheless, reviews offer a good base to understand what to expect.

Ceever (talk) 11:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Include housesitting?

Should we include housesitting into this article? It could be a case between volunteering and hospitality exchange, but I would tend to include it here.

If anyone has more experience on this side and knows popular services, we could include a list of such services, maybe separately or as part of "Free or Flat fee".

I remember someone here in Europe telling me about it, but they mentioned a website that I could not find on the generic "I cover this topic" websites.

Cheers Ceever (talk) 11:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)