Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Turning Down requests for dog aggressive dogs

Hi- so, I board multiple dogs. I had a couple of good matches in the beginning, everything was great.

But recently, I've gotten several requests for dogs that were clearly dog reactive/aggressive in some way. I've had to turn down 4 requests in a row for this reason, common sense and safety.

I know the way it works in that, when you turn down requests you get dinged farther down the list, even for this kind of reason. 
It seems like a total bummer on a personal level, and just bad programming/algorithm. It also feels very inequitable. To push a sitter farther and farther down the list just for making very responsible and good choices. 

Seems a more level playing field would be to list sitters by location to the pet owner, the way Yelp does. 

I'll keep using Rover, I've only been on it for a few months to see if things improve, But that is what struck me immediately, the rating system.  A good sitter shouldn't be "punished" for making good choices. I'm going to contact customer support as well, just to see if I can chat with someone but just thought I'd reach out here as well. Thoughts?