Manual do Hóspede

Writing guide · five rules maximum

House rules guests actually follow

A twenty-item rule list reads as hostility and gets skimmed into oblivion — the two most common failure modes hosts report are 'nobody reads them' and 'the listing feels unwelcoming'. Both are wording problems.

The five that cover real risk

Each with the wording pattern that works: the rule, then its because. Reasons convert a prohibition into a request between adults.

  • Quiet hours — with the building as the author"Quiet after 10pm — the building enforces this, not us." Naming the building depersonalizes the rule: the guest isn't obeying you, they're coexisting with neighbors. This is the rule whose violation costs you most (formal complaints, fines), so it goes first.
  • Smoking — with the alternative in the same sentence"No smoking indoors; the balcony is fine and there's an ashtray." A rule that offers the path costs almost nothing to follow. A bare prohibition invites the bathroom-window workaround every host knows.
  • Pets — with the reason that isn't about you"We can't host pets — the next guest may be allergic." True, checkable, and impossible to take personally. If you do allow pets, this line becomes your differentiator instead; either way the topic must be settled before booking, not at the door.
  • Visitors — the rule that needs a boundary, not a ban"Daytime visitors are welcome; anyone staying overnight beyond the booking, ask us first." A total ban is unenforceable and reads as paranoid. A clear boundary distinguishes the dinner guest from the unregistered occupant, which is the actual risk.
  • Parties — the one absolute, with its cost"Parties: no. Neighbors report them, the building fines us, and the fine becomes yours." This is the rule where consequences belong in the text, because the platform itself sides with you — party bans are standard and enforceable.

Why five and not twenty

Every rule beyond these five taxes the reader's attention and dilutes the ones that matter. 'Don't move the furniture', 'no shoes on the sofa', 'wash your dishes' — each may be a genuine preference, but a rule list is a risk document, not a preferences document. Preferences belong in the checkout section as requests ('leave used towels in the bathroom'), where the manual's structure already has a place for them.

Placement does the remaining work. Rules stated only at booking get forgotten by arrival; rules stated only on the wall get read after the violation. The pattern that holds: the five rules in the listing (sets expectations, filters bookings), repeated in the digital manual sent before arrival, with quiet hours alone on the printed card — the one rule broken at 11pm, when nobody re-opens a link. The manual page itself is where the reasons live, and keeping that page current is exactly the job Guest Manual wants to take off your hands.

The disputes

Shouldn't I list every fine and penalty?
One consequence, on the party rule, is credible. A fee schedule attached to every rule reads as a trap and shows up in reviews as 'felt like a legal document'. Real damage is covered by the platform's damage process regardless of what your list says.
What about rules for the building I don't control?
Building rules (pool hours, parking, elevator moves) go in the trash-and-building section of the manual as facts of the place, not as your rules. Guests treat 'the building closes the pool at 10' as geography, not as you saying no.
Do rules with reasons actually change behavior?
The pattern hosts report is consistent: rules framed as requests with causes get followed and mentioned positively ('clear, reasonable house rules') while identical rules framed as commands generate friction. The sample is anecdotal but large — and the downside of adding a 'because' is zero.