On the left you can see what I get in Rhino when I receive the stream, while on the right you can see what I get in Rhino while using Rhino.Inside (of course I have used a filter to cull the unplaced rooms). Because if I do not cull them rooms, I get the same result as with Speckle.
If not possible, would there be a way to filter those unplaced rooms later with Grasshopper? Rhino would be even better. Because I cannot see any mention to this in the Rhino properties.
Thanks for the answer. The quick answer is no, but there are users with different skill levels in the team and Speckle is much more user friendly than other options. By the way, this is not for scheduling, but for Daylight studies, so models tend to be a little bit messier in these phases.
But if the only way is to keep clean models, that should not be a problem.
There are situations in which uplaced rooms might be needed too for scheduling purposes etc.
So a solution could be to use Revit’s native filters as selection method, which allow you to create very complex rule based selection sets:
My suggestion would be not to export geometry for objects which do not have one. So, the rooms will be available in schedules (have no idea when it could be usefull) but won’t litter in the model.
That’s a pretty good compromise. We’ve heard that there are use cases around scheduling unplaced rooms, but your solution solves a practical AND existential concern — how much volume does a nonexistent room contain?
. That gives me a lot of ideas for other workflows 
.