RV Park Reviews

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

26 Pages V « < 8 9 10 11 12 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Changes To Review Submittals, Everybody please read
rvgirl42
post May 27 2008, 02:10 PM
Post #136


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 5-October 06
Member No.: 9337



I think it's a great idea. I am a single woman who RV's and I want the truth about the campgrounds I visit, not the opinion of the campground owner or employee.

If someone posts three times, it shows they actually visit other RV parks and aren't out to slam one single campground. Additionally, if an RV park manager or employee "knows" who posted a negative review on this board and tells other customers about that person (to tell their side), they better get ready for some serious trouble - possibly legal if that customer finds out. People don't pay to stay at these campgrounds to be slammed to other customers because they didn't like their park.

There will always be people who don't like a place and if the RV park owner expects 100% positive reviews, they are dreaming. Besides, if they took the customer's money, they should just keep "their side" to themselves - unless they gave the customer a refund, of course, which is highly unlikely at any park.

One review by one reviewer isn't balanced. I've had too many bad experiences from "well rated" campground reviews and I can't afford that lack of information. It isn't safe for me. If I see someone post three times - say, two good reviews and one bad review, I trust that reviewer.

I hate to say it, but I appreciate a bad review of a campground. There are too many other places I can visit instead, so you will find my three, four, five, or six reviews on this board. I will probably only have one bad review out of all of them, but that one bad review can save everyone money, grief, and time.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mdcamping
post May 30 2008, 05:06 PM
Post #137


Advanced Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 222
Joined: 3-July 07
From: CT
Member No.: 14145



I think more quality control needs to take place on this website when it comes to posting first time reviews. I think each review should be read first carefully, maybe by some one that's at least familiar with the campground from that area.

This would help reduce the risk of campground owners,managers or friends of the owners from posting biased reviews. IMHO

Mike

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DXSMac
post May 31 2008, 08:40 AM
Post #138


Advanced Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2099
Joined: 12-September 07
From: Pacific Northwest
Member No.: 16651



QUOTE(mdcamping @ May 30 2008, 04:06 PM) *

I think more quality control needs to take place on this website when it comes to posting first time reviews. I think each review should be read first carefully, maybe by some one that's at least familiar with the campground from that area.

This would help reduce the risk of campground owners,managers or friends of the owners from posting biased reviews. IMHO

Mike


I think they DO read them carefully. One of mine got "edited" (some stuff removed). I was a little ticked about that.... It might have been a space limitation issue, because that particular review was a lengthy review, (both positive and negative points about a park), although I think there isn't supposed to be a space limitation from my understanding.....

JJ


--------------------
JJ from Pacific Northwest

Check out my blog on TOADLESS RVing!
http://rvingtoadless.blogspot.com/

Feel free to leave me some suggestions.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Texasrvers
post May 31 2008, 01:19 PM
Post #139


Advanced Member
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 3714
Joined: 6-March 06
Member No.: 5452



I agree with JJ. I think all reviews are read before they are posted, but not necessarily by someone who is familiar with the park. I also think that the people who read the reviews try to watch for “pumped up” reviews by campground owners and their friends, although I am sure some slip by. (Right now I could name at least one CG that has several suspicious reviews.) Even if the first review is biased subsequent reviews will tell the real story. Just my $.02.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mdcamping
post May 31 2008, 06:37 PM
Post #140


Advanced Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 222
Joined: 3-July 07
From: CT
Member No.: 14145



QUOTE(Texasrvers @ May 31 2008, 03:19 PM) *

I agree with JJ. I think all reviews are read before they are posted, but not necessarily by someone who is familiar with the park. I also think that the people who read the reviews try to watch for “pumped up” reviews by campground owners and their friends, although I am sure some slip by. (Right now I could name at least one CG that has several suspicious reviews.) Even if the first review is biased subsequent reviews will tell the real story. Just my $.02.


I'm also aware of a campground that has several suspicious reviews. (the reason why I wrote my first post)This is a campground that I've been to and where I my self have posted a review.

I'm sure the people who read the reviews are doing the best that they can but if they had some one responsible for reviewing just a certain region along with maybe making more judgement calls concerning weather a first time review is posted that this might reduce those suspicious reviews from being posted. IMHO

Mike
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
genekatt
post Jun 30 2008, 01:17 PM
Post #141


Newbie
*

Group: Moderated
Posts: 2
Joined: 26-June 08
Member No.: 22787



Altho we have been RVers since 1992, we just started full-timing on June 1, 2008. We find this site extremely helpful, and wish I had known about it sooner.

Since you know that some parks and/or park employees are posting, I can only assume that you have a way of checking on the origin of any post. So why not just delete these posts rather than "punish" the rest of the users? This is done on another site that we frequent, and while a few folks might see if before it gets deleted, the majority probably won't. Another thing that could be done to alert the rest of us of the owner/employee posts, is to identify it as such so that we would know it was biased.

We love this site, and deferring a recent post because of the misuse of a few, doesn't seem conducive to your purpose of the latest user reviews. dry.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave-and-Ellen
post Jul 18 2008, 02:51 PM
Post #142


Advanced Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 12-August 06
Member No.: 8277



I have sent in at least 2 reports. They take a while to type and whenever I do send them in, it says that I need 2 more. After all of this, I just do not post any reviews any more. Sorry, but I agree with the above...the few that are "bad" posts can be removed. Also, if you look at a parks reviews and there is only 1 posted, it "may" not have as much meaning as a park with MANY reviews. If the trend is very good, then that has more meaning and a few posts by the staff can not turn a bad park into a good one.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jmc1205
post Jul 24 2008, 11:41 AM
Post #143


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 24-February 07
Member No.: 11021



QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 4 2006, 09:18 AM) *

We have found it necessary to add some more security to the website when it comes to approving reviews. All members will now have to submit a minimum of three (3) different campgrounds before any of their reviews will be posted on the website. If you have not seen a recent review you submitted posted on the website that is because it is in a holding queue until the five review quota has been met and then they will automatically transfer to the approval queue and will then be posted. Any member that has already posted five or more will see no change. Sorry we have to do this but some campground owner's/employees think they don't have to follow the rules of this website and continue to try to post great reviews about their campground. The "great" campgrounds will never have to do that as they will always receive positive reviews from their customers. smile.gif We have caught several and will continue to do so to try to keep this website as it was intended.

I want you to know something that happened to me. I went to Carlsbad, NM and stayed at this one park and when morning came I was not going to stay there one day more. I looked around at some of the other parks and the one I wanted was full that day but a spot would open in a few days, so I stayed in the next best one until then. I have found my favorite park in Carlsbad and I will continue to give it good reviews, if they are full I will stay at second best but a few I will never visit again. I reviewed many parks in the same town in a short time period. There are some parks that a worth the hassle of moving to and there are some parks that are worth the hassle to leave. I am not able to travel like I used to because of my MS but I do go to Carlsbad to see my daughter every six months or so. Most of my reviews will be limited to a few parks.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ttg
post Jul 27 2008, 11:17 PM
Post #144


Newbie
*

Group: Moderated
Posts: 4
Joined: 27-July 08
Member No.: 24298



Thank you for all your hard work. I do understand the issue at hand and why you feel the need to require 3 reviews prior to publishing. However, perhaps by vetting your reviewers when they register you might be better able to weed out the undesirables. Having said that, we typically check the Trailer Life Directory and then check whatever online reviews are available. So far, we've been lucky in our choices. We're full-timers and on the road most of the year. I would estimate we boondock about 70% of the time and stay in campgrounds the other 30%, so this site and others like it are very helpful to us. Again, thanks for this great service.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dragonfly
post Aug 1 2008, 10:57 AM
Post #145


Newbie
*

Group: Moderated
Posts: 1
Joined: 12-July 08
Member No.: 23549



Thank you for being so vigilent in regards to the posting of reviews. I was delighted to find your site. We are fairly new to motorhoming and we depend on these reviews. We have been disappointed a few times after finding an rv park with spaces that were too tight and not well landscaped and manicured and a staff that was coldly indifferent. We thank you, again. smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kjh
post Aug 11 2008, 12:57 PM
Post #146


Newbie
*

Group: Moderated
Posts: 3
Joined: 21-July 08
Member No.: 23980



[size=1]Okay, now I am confused. I reviewed 2 campgrounds last month and a third today. What is with the 5?? I understood the rule said that after 3 reviews they would be posted. What am I missing????
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DXSMac
post Aug 11 2008, 01:20 PM
Post #147


Advanced Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2099
Joined: 12-September 07
From: Pacific Northwest
Member No.: 16651



QUOTE(kjh @ Aug 11 2008, 11:57 AM) *

[size=1]Okay, now I am confused. I reviewed 2 campgrounds last month and a third today. What is with the 5?? I understood the rule said that after 3 reviews they would be posted. What am I missing????


It was changed back to three awhile ago. As soon as you get your "Required three" in, all three will appear after they are "approved" by the hard working admins.

JJ


--------------------
JJ from Pacific Northwest

Check out my blog on TOADLESS RVing!
http://rvingtoadless.blogspot.com/

Feel free to leave me some suggestions.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ldr1992
post Aug 25 2008, 02:57 PM
Post #148


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 25-August 08
From: Massachusetts
Member No.: 25525



QUOTE(DXSMac @ Aug 11 2008, 03:20 PM) *

It was changed back to three awhile ago. As soon as you get your "Required three" in, all three will appear after they are "approved" by the hard working admins.

JJ

Thank you for answering/clarifying this. I just posted on the general forum thread--and wondered why 5 was the limit--and not 3. Glad to see it IS 3...which is much more reasonable (and do-able!)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mch2464
post Aug 27 2008, 07:15 PM
Post #149


Newbie
*

Group: Moderated
Posts: 3
Joined: 27-August 08
Member No.: 25618



QUOTE(pjtjmn @ Jul 17 2006, 04:39 PM) *

Just a thought..

Five different locations? Wow, I just started camping, and I thought we were doing a lot of different locations this year at 4!!! With all the good reviews in "pending" status, we will be missing out on valuable information..

I understand why you want to do this, but maybe there is another way to keep this honest??
The new way actually gives the dishonest folks incentive to not only try to pump up their place, but hurt others..

For example, if I were a dishonest CG owner, I could always give my own place glowing reviews and poor-to-middling reviews to nearby places...

I was wondering why my review from two weeks ago didn't post!

Maybe we could brainstorm a bit to think of another solution?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mch2464
post Aug 27 2008, 07:57 PM
Post #150


Newbie
*

Group: Moderated
Posts: 3
Joined: 27-August 08
Member No.: 25618



Hello, As both a rv park owner and a rv owner. I get both sides. We would never post a review of our own park and would want to make sure that no one else would do that as well. However it would be nice if there was a way to be able to rebut a review that wasn't truthful or to explain why we did what we did. We try to be honest and above board with all of our guests and they usually are with us as well. But sometimes people forget that we are trying to run a business, and we can't do that if we can't make a profit. Also guests forget that we only make our money in 3 months time and we have to maintain and pay for labor, utilities, and maintenance all year. So sometimes that is a factor in our policies. We cheerfully give discounts for Good Sam, AARP, Active Military and FMCA when cards are presented at the time of check in. That is what we are told to do by the different people that we are supposed to give discounts to. Our other problem is cancellations. We ask for one nights deposit in advance. We had to do that because when we didn't ask for a deposit, people never bothered to let us know if they were coming or not so we were holding a site for someone who had no intentions in coming and staying with us. We also will give the deposit less 20% if a guest gives us at least 10 days notice in advance. If it is less notice then that it is our discretion and if the cancellation is a valid reason, car problems, sick person or something like that we will usually give at least 1/2 back anyway. If it is because the guest doesn't like the weather forecast or doesn't show up then they lose the deposit. Does that sound fair? Please let me know what you think.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

26 Pages V « < 8 9 10 11 12 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version
RVParkReviews.com