Changes To Review Submittals, Everybody please read Options

[Texasrvers]

nhted,

As John said we have ways of identifying less than honest reviews. I'm sorry, but I do not understand how that penalizes you.

[countryacresowner]

Great thoughts!

I've been on this forum for a long time and I just feel totally offended by this new rule...I think it's totally inappropriate and serves no real purpose.
I am another vote for there otta be a better way. I reviewed at least one other park that got listed right away. Now my latest review is held up pending who knows how long. I even sent in a correction to another park listed in error but I suppose that can't be released either. Why don't you ask for references from new people before you allow them to review? Rv.Net or Escapees would be good sources.

[font=Tahoma][size=7]IT IS FUNNY YOU MENTION THAT IF A DISHONEST CAMPGROUND OWNER CAN POST A BAD REVIEW ABOUT THEIR COMPETITION AND GIVE THEMSELVES RAVING REVIEWS. WELL I THINK THIS HAS HAPPENED TO ME. THE REVIEWS SHOW A MUCH HIGHER PRICE THAN I CHARGE SO THAT FOR ONE IS FALSE. THEY TALK ABOUT MY ELECTRIC BEING INADEQUATE AND NOBODY APPROACHED ME ABOUT ANYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT YET THEY WENT TO THE OTHER PARK AND IT WAS PERFECT. THEY SAID MY WIFI WASNT WORKING, MY TV WASNT WORKING. WOW, IF IT WAS THAT BAD I THINK THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN OTHER REVIEWS BESIDES THOSE "THREE" THAT GOT TOGETHER AND POSTED THAT. THERE SEEMS TO BE NO WAY FOR A CAMPGROUND OWNER TO DEFEND HIMSELF. RV PARK REVIEWS NEED TO BE SUED FOR EVERYTHING THEY GOT IF THIS HAPPENS AGAIN. THE PERSON NEEDS TO POST THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS GOING THROUGH THIS SITE AND BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

[Denali]

[font=Tahoma][size=7]IT IS FUNNY YOU MENTION THAT IF A DISHONEST CAMPGROUND OWNER CAN POST A BAD REVIEW ABOUT THEIR COMPETITION AND GIVE THEMSELVES RAVING REVIEWS. WELL I THINK THIS HAS HAPPENED TO ME. THE REVIEWS SHOW A MUCH HIGHER PRICE THAN I CHARGE SO THAT FOR ONE IS FALSE. THEY TALK ABOUT MY ELECTRIC BEING INADEQUATE AND NOBODY APPROACHED ME ABOUT ANYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT YET THEY WENT TO THE OTHER PARK AND IT WAS PERFECT. THEY SAID MY WIFI WASNT WORKING, MY TV WASNT WORKING. WOW, IF IT WAS THAT BAD I THINK THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN OTHER REVIEWS BESIDES THOSE "THREE" THAT GOT TOGETHER AND POSTED THAT. THERE SEEMS TO BE NO WAY FOR A CAMPGROUND OWNER TO DEFEND HIMSELF. RV PARK REVIEWS NEED TO BE SUED FOR EVERYTHING THEY GOT IF THIS HAPPENS AGAIN. THE PERSON NEEDS TO POST THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS GOING THROUGH THIS SITE AND BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

From the user name and description of the bad reviews, I assume this is from the owner of Country Acres RV Park & Motel in Lamar, CO.

The negative reviews said that they paid $36-38. The park's entry on Passport America says that the normal rate is $34 (plus tax, I assume). Doesn't sound like a "much higher price" to me.

The three reviews were posted by three different reviewers, each of whom had previously posted seven to 31 reviews. That doesn't sound like a rival park owner.

Reading those reviews and comparing them with the generally average reviews the park has received in the past, I would guess that the park had some problems with power in November and December last year. Anybody who travels much knows that the quality of cable TV can vary from site to site in a park.

Who knows whether the customers or the park staff were at fault for the less than pleasant interactions the reviewers reported?

[WE3ZS]

I did not realize when I signed on here that you needed to submit 5 reviews before one gets posted. We just had a horrible experience at a campground in DE and wanted to warn other campers. There are other negative posts about this campground on the internet....head those warnings.. (Not sure if I can name the campground here).

[FosterImposters]

Hmmm.
It's only 2 or 3 reviews now.
Make sure you incorporate some detail about the campground itself.
You know: pad condition, hook-ups, cleanliness, road condition.
Hope you have many more GOOD camping experiences in your future!
Cheers!

[JDRobar]

I didn't read all 19 pages of your responses, so please forgive me if this has already been discussed ; however, I have a suggestion for keeping RV park owners from posting disingenuous comments on the site.

If, while reading about a particular park, the reader is offered the capability to see all reviews an author has ever created along with date created, in the reverse order created, it will make deceitful entries a harder task.

If a single entry to a Park is suspicious, by looking at the poster's history, RVers can formulate their own opinions about the reviewer/entry. Did all their entries happen on the same date (as an unaware, conniving person might do)? Did they attack everyone except one park in a particular area ? Regular bloggers will have a legit history spread over time, and the lack thereof most likely will clue readers as to the contributor's intentions should they be out of sync with other opinions. This will allow the viewers to identify those pesky, duplicitous RV Park owners for themselves. And hey, maybe some Park owners submit heartfelt reviews on a legit basis - that's cool - I'm sure some of them take a busman's holiday too. Afterall, we're just looking at opinions here, right ?

It will also encourage authentic reviewers to stay with the site, as they will earn a certain amount of respect for their valued opinions. Over time, some contributors may become well known 'critics', with reputations that can be trusted. It may even lead towards a more cohesive community of RVers if you were to 'rate the raters' somehow. Ok, so the last part is jumping the shark

Of course, this assumes the User Name is a key in your database. But, that does appear to be the case. I am not familiar with your software, so this may be a lot harder/more expensive solution than it sounds, or than you wanted to pursue. So be aware, readers, don't get too revved if you are sold on the idea until the person that is putting in the time has passed judgment.

Just my input as a former, Fortune 500 programmer/analyst.

[Texasrvers]

JDRobar,

Your suggestion sounds like a good one, but if I am understanding your comments correctly we already have this ability. Look at any review and you will see a message at the end that says, "The user that posted this review has XX other reviews online. Click here to see them." The reviews contain the date and are in reverse order so that members can see a particular person's past reviews. This is what you are suggesting, isn't it?

Now however, there is one comment where you are a bit off base. You say, "And hey, maybe some Park owners submit heartfelt reviews on a legit basis - that's cool - I'm sure some of them take a busman's holiday too. Afterall, we're just looking at opinions here, right ?" Legitimate and heartfelt or not, our rules state that park owners or employees may not submit reviews for their own or any other park. We feel this removes any temptation to embellish or degrade parks unfairly.

Thanks for your interest in making this a better website. Your input is appreciated.

[JDRobar]

This is what you are suggesting, isn't it?

To quote Duck Dodgers of the 24th and a half Century, "This wouldn't be so embarrassing if it weren't so true."

Whoops! Ah say....Ah say son...... To be truthful, I hadn't needed to look at the Reviews just yet, as I'm as stuck as a bug on fly-paper til the little lady retires at the end of this month . I made a REALLY bad assumption based purely on what other comments (or lack thereof) I had read in the first three pages. My apologies for the lack of proper research, I'm heartened you realized it was in the interest of helping.

On the "off base" comment, just my opinion (we all know what they are like, and that everyone has one ). Having said that, I'm also aware of the adage that if you join a society, be willing to accept its rules. So, no beef here, sir.

I'd like to say, you are very tolerant in your attempts to hear people out. Obvious while you provide a free service you are indeed aware, nay, striving to give EXCELLENT service. From my perspective, that breaks a lot of molds!

Please, keep up the good work.

[Texasrvers]

To quote Duck Dodgers of the 24th and a half Century, "This wouldn't be so embarrassing if it weren't so true."

Whoops! Ah say....Ah say son...... To be truthful, I hadn't needed to look at the Reviews just yet, as I'm as stuck as a bug on fly-paper til the little lady retires at the end of this month . I made a REALLY bad assumption based purely on what other comments (or lack thereof) I had read in the first three pages. My apologies for the lack of proper research, I'm heartened you realized it was in the interest of helping.

Not a problem. Just hurry up and get to the end of the month so that you can use those reviews and get out on the road!!

[dbwtexas]

OK, I have reviewed 7 campgrounds today! I am a new member & am playing catch-up. We left Texas on June 15th & are now in Maine. Needless to say we have stayed at several campgrounds since leaving home. I am curious as to why my reviews have not posted?(eibbedtx@yahoo.com)

[Texasrvers]

The main reason is that there are currently 198 reviews waiting to be approved, and 95 of them are in line before yours. During the summer it is not unusual for us to get over 200 reviews each day. Each one is read and corrected if needed by one of our volunteer admins. We get to these reviews as fast as we can, but sometimes it takes several days. Please be patient, and your reviews will appear soon.

[joe4golf]

Great job of keeping this site relevant.

[Mingo]

Your respect for security is appreciated. I just signed up to post reviews and value this site to help research campgrounds. It is a shame that cg's feel they must toot their own horns. May I suggest that instead of penalizing the honest writers, that those campgrounds who post their own reviews be exposed. What better penalty than to post the names of the campgrounds that are not handling themselves ethically? I would not bother to do business with them.

[Avanti3106]

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. :) We have caught several and will continue to do so to try to keep this website as it was intended.

[RVCorgi]

This explains why my earlier review just showed up when I added a few from a recent trip. Too bad you have to do this, but thanks for keeping it honest.