You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
One thing I liked Uber was that, unlike cabs, they won't regularly refuse to take you to "bad" neighborhoods, but this new policy seems like a reversal -- they'll now ban riders who regularly take trips to bad neighborhoods. https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/29/uber-will-start-deactivating-riders-with-low-ratings/ …pic.twitter.com/BkolzWTHF0
I used to live in a "bad" neighborhood and had a low Uber rating as a result of taking Ubers there (rating improved after I moved). Anecdotally, other things that reduce people's rating and will get them banned are being disabled and having a wheelchair and traveling with kids.
This policy protects drivers from harassment and shitty behavior. Wherever the cutoff is for low ratings, it will almost certainly not be set in a manner that bans clients from entire neighborhoods.
This is such a bad way to do that that it's hard to believe that can be the goal. Harassing a driver has the same weight as making a a driver go to a bad neighborhood or having crutches or having a wheelchair, etc. If you want to stop harassment, ban harassers directly.
Also - sorry I know I'm changing the topic - this is a clear example of how a 5 star rating system is complete nonsense. Banning 4.6 and below? If you got 4.6/5 on a school assignment that's an A. My solution to this is simple: binary feedback. It's either neutral, or positive
Interesting – one reason for Uber’s Problems in Germany was that regular cabs can’t refuse unprofitable rides (and „bad“ neighborhoods don’t really exist), while Uber wanted to cherry-pick. Taxis are seen as Part of Public Transport here and are obliged to offer service.
I’m a former employee but not an apologist by far—most of my feed shits on uber’s crappy eng culture—but this strikes me as a thoughtful policy intended to protect the more vulnerable, oft neglected side of the market.
I think people are misreading Dan’s snippet. The 4.6 in the article refers to driver ratings, so none of you who have replied are at risk. 4.6 may have been a blanket policy in Uber’s early days, but they’ve long since moved to more nuanced, locale specific models.
once again inhave failed to understand how to reply to people on twitter
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
