Did you read the article?

> Airbnb said it would also accelerate the use of instant bookings, which lets renters book places immediately without host approval.

The fact that the author of your parent-comment does go through and approve individuals means that this policy would hurt him/her.

What evidence is there that instant booking guests are more destructive than others?

>The fact that the author of your parent-comment does go through and approve individuals means that this policy would hurt him/her.

How, exactly? It sounds like he talked to his destructive guest before the rental. So that particular guest was not an instant booking.

I posted an example above but instant book doesn't force a potential renter to be screened which makes it easier for destructive guests to book. If you're throwing a party, would you rather instant book or have to chat with the host?

As my example, if a renter instant books and is going to bring 40 people to a place you are legally approved locally for sleeping 14, other neighbors can report you to the city and you could be fined or lose your license to rent.

So you can have issues with instant bookers even if they aren't destructive.

> What evidence is there that instant booking guests are more destructive than others?

OP isn't saying that they are, they're saying that they now want to apply a new screen (out-of-town-ness) that they think is evidence of not being destructive, but would be unable to do so if Airbnb forced everyone to allow instant bookings.

But they're not mandating instant booking.