Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Review Not Posted
RV Park Reviews Campground Discussion Forum > RV Park and Campground Discussions > RV Park Discussions
gritz
I posted a review that was accepted on 9/17/2012 on Farewell Bend. (Huntington) but never published or posted to this review site. Since I included a lot of detail for accuracy in case an RVer' was looking for a site that could pickup up Verizon cell phone service, which means Internet with a smartphone, I was disappointed when the review was not published. In further checking, it seems that a lot of reviews are painfully old so I suspect you won't get much current information, at least in Farewell Bend. But in case you need the Internet, site #112 can do it, with a booster. My SS was actually -59 dBm ... which is a good as it gets.
Texasrvers

I found a review for Farewell Bend that was submitted under a different username. However, I believe it is yours. The problem here is that our records show that you have submitted only one review. Our guidelines state that you must submit 3 reviews before they will be posted.
rvingup
I thought I read a month ago, it was submit 2 reviews... not 3? Please clarify.
Texasrvers
It is 3.
gritz
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Sep 25 2012, 06:17 PM) *

I found a review for Farewell Bend that was submitted under a different username. However, I believe it is yours. The problem here is that our records show that you have submitted only one review. Our guidelines state that you must submit 3 reviews before they will be posted.


I guess I'm not understanding the value of denying a reviewer submission because he has not submitted 3 RV reviews. Seems like a real waste of valuable information and a downer for intermittent campers. We went twice this Fall and I spent a fair amount of time trying to be informative and helpful .... but to say you need 3 reviews?? Doesn't make sense. If I can't see my post online and re-edit if necessary, I won't be back. I will go where my views are appreciated. Life is too short to wait a year to see if your post went live. I encourage you to rethink your policy ... it could develop into a great resource.

Jim Lindbloom
Denali
QUOTE(gritz @ Oct 22 2012, 08:06 AM) *
...If I can't see my post online and re-edit if necessary, I won't be back...
Jim Lindbloom
Reviews cannot be edited once they are posted.
docj
QUOTE(gritz @ Oct 22 2012, 11:06 AM) *

I guess I'm not understanding the value of denying a reviewer submission because he has not submitted 3 RV reviews. Seems like a real waste of valuable information and a downer for intermittent campers.


I think this policy stems from the fact that there are two classes of reviews that the website would prefer to filter out.

One class of review comes from individuals who own or are associated with campgrounds and is submitted for the sole purpose of "pumping up" the CG's reputation and increasing its business. Such reviews typically come from people who aren't really RVers and have registered on the website solely for the purpose of submitting this one review. Although the policy of forcing them to submit two additional reviews of other CG's doesn't completely eliminate such folks, it does make it more difficult, especially if they don't happen to even own an RV.

The other class of review comes from individuals who aren't interested in using the website for sharing of reviews other than for one review they wish to submit about a particularly bad experience they have had at some CG. It's not that such bad experiences shouldn't be posted but I think the purpose of the website is to create a broadly-based sharing of park reviews, not just to flame a particular park because of one's perception of not having been treated well.

If the person submitting the review is, in fact, an RVer with an interest in the community, the requirement to submit two additional reviews shouldn't be such a burdensome one. Even casual RVers typically use their rigs a couple of times a season.

Those of us who rely on this website as our primary source of CG information, are accustomed to using our own "filters" for reading reviews and deciding their relevance to ourselves. However, having the website filter the most egregiously good or bad reviews improves the odds that those that are published better represent a true perspective of the park being reviewed.
rkw99
QUOTE(docj @ Oct 22 2012, 11:32 AM) *

I think this policy stems from the fact that there are two classes of reviews that the website would prefer to filter out.

One class of review comes from individuals who own or are associated with campgrounds and is submitted for the sole purpose of "pumping up" the CG's reputation and increasing its business. Such reviews typically come from people who aren't really RVers and have registered on the website solely for the purpose of submitting this one review. Although the policy of forcing them to submit two additional reviews of other CG's doesn't completely eliminate such folks, it does make it more difficult, especially if they don't happen to even own an RV.



Yes, because campground owners and associates who want to "pump up" a particular campground are too stupid to figure out how to circumvent such filters. Insert eyeroll
weighit
Another case of the rules don't apply to me. It said you have to post 3 different campground reviews before they will start showing up, and you post one review and are complaining the rules are too strict. Maybe we should change them for you, then again, maybe not. Hundreds of others seem to think the site works fine and they come here for the great information submitted by those that followed the rules.
dog bone
If I can't see my post online and re-edit if necessary, I won't be back. I will go where my views are appreciated. Life is too short to wait a year to see if your post went live.

gritz. I'm sorry you feel that way. If you enjoy camping, I don't know why it would be hard just to post 2 more reviews.
My member number is 250, now there are over 50,000 members on this site. This is one of the best, if not the best, places to research for a campground. The rules are in place not to just help us, but to help the webmaster and the moderators make their job just a bit easier. I don't know if you know how much time and effort it takes to operate a site like this.
I don't know why this is typing in bold print. I tried a couple of ways to just do regular print, but it just stays like this. I don't want anyone to think I was yelling.
I got it. It got stuck on bold, even though I clicked it off.


RanMan
QUOTE(dog bone @ Oct 24 2012, 01:46 PM) *


I don't know why this is typing in bold print. I tried a couple of ways to just do regular print, but it just stays like this. I don't want anyone to think I was yelling.


I DID NOT THINK YOU WERE YELLING BECAUSE YOU WERE NOT TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS. biggrin.gif
fistymc
I understand the reasons for moderating posts, but I have an issue with a recent review I made. I'm sorry for hijacking this thread...

I recently tried to post a review on a park that we *tried* to stay at but the check in experience was so bad that we ended up not being able to even get in. My submission was denied.

I have tried to contact the park to no avail and I think it is important for others to know about the experience. Is there somewhere else on this site where I can post this particular issue? I am new to this review site, but travel full time in my rig with family in tow. I'm not big on bashing a park and understand that things just happen sometimes but also feel that each person's experience helps to paint a better picture of the park. Thanks!
Texasrvers
QUOTE(fistymc @ Dec 26 2012, 04:27 PM) *

I understand the reasons for moderating posts, but I have an issue with a recent review I made. I'm sorry for hijacking this thread...

I recently tried to post a review on a park that we *tried* to stay at but the check in experience was so bad that we ended up not being able to even get in. My submission was denied.

I have tried to contact the park to no avail and I think it is important for others to know about the experience. Is there somewhere else on this site where I can post this particular issue? I am new to this review site, but travel full time in my rig with family in tow. I'm not big on bashing a park and understand that things just happen sometimes but also feel that each person's experience helps to paint a better picture of the park. Thanks!


See reply under the new thread started about this concern.
rkw99
QUOTE(fistymc @ Dec 26 2012, 05:27 PM) *

I understand the reasons for moderating posts, but I have an issue with a recent review I made. I'm sorry for hijacking this thread...

I recently tried to post a review on a park that we *tried* to stay at but the check in experience was so bad that we ended up not being able to even get in. My submission was denied.

I have tried to contact the park to no avail and I think it is important for others to know about the experience. Is there somewhere else on this site where I can post this particular issue? I am new to this review site, but travel full time in my rig with family in tow. I'm not big on bashing a park and understand that things just happen sometimes but also feel that each person's experience helps to paint a better picture of the park. Thanks!



Yet another example of inconsistency with following "the rules" for posting reviews. Apparently your experience not actually staying in a park is not a helpful review but this one is:

We read the reviews on this campground and choose it because it had everything we needed. Upon arrival, we were told the daily rate was $32 for 2-3 people. When we asked for an internet code, we were handed a rate sheet, starting at $3.95 for 1/2 hour and ending with a monthly rate. We know that some parks charge for internet (although in our travels thru most of the US and CA we have never paid), but $4 for 1/2 hour is ridiculous. We drove another ~15 miles and found a wonderful campground for $26.50 per night with free internet. We camped here in a Fifth Wheel
Texasrvers
QUOTE(rkw99 @ Dec 28 2012, 01:57 PM) *

Yet another example of inconsistency with following "the rules" for posting reviews. Apparently your experience not actually staying in a park is not a helpful review but this one is:

We read the reviews on this campground and choose it because it had everything we needed. Upon arrival, we were told the daily rate was $32 for 2-3 people. When we asked for an internet code, we were handed a rate sheet, starting at $3.95 for 1/2 hour and ending with a monthly rate. We know that some parks charge for internet (although in our travels thru most of the US and CA we have never paid), but $4 for 1/2 hour is ridiculous. We drove another ~15 miles and found a wonderful campground for $26.50 per night with free internet. We camped here in a Fifth Wheel


I agree. In my opinion this "review" does not meet our criteria for posting. However, it was posted over 2 years ago, and I hope we have gotten more consistent since then. At least we have tried to do so, but some bad reviews do slip through.
pianotuna
Hi,

The admins are all volunteers and this is a free site with over 175,000 reviews. At one review per minute (impossibly fast imho) it would take over 100 8 hour days to vet them all.

No one is forcing anyone to use this site. The wonder is that there are so many excellent reviews.
wprigge
Right on pianotuna! smile.gif
mdcamping
QUOTE(wprigge @ Dec 29 2012, 10:29 AM) *

Right on pianotuna! smile.gif


X2

Mike
FosterImposters
QUOTE(pianotuna @ Dec 29 2012, 05:23 AM) *

The wonder is that there are so many excellent reviews.

Have lost track of the number of years we have used this site to research campgrounds and RV parks as we have traveled through this life. Am pleased to note we took the plunge, and posted a couple reviews as well. Very fulfilling to be part of this body of work.
And on that note:
Happy New Year everyone. Hope to see you camping in 2013!
cool.gif
cKarlGo
QUOTE(FosterImposters @ Dec 29 2012, 12:58 PM) *

Have lost track of the number of years we have used this site to research campgrounds and RV parks as we have traveled through this life. Am pleased to note we took the plunge, and posted a couple reviews as well. Very fulfilling to be part of this body of work.
And on that note:
Happy New Year everyone. Hope to see you camping in 2013!
cool.gif


I never make reservations anywhere that I do not read the reviews on here first. I rarely stay anywhere that lacks reviews or has multiple bad reviews from reviewers who are well into the double-digits.
joez
QUOTE
I rarely stay anywhere that lacks reviews


This site is really our only source to find a place to park,also. A few years ago, though, we were in an area where no campgrounds had been reviewed here. We thought that if everybody who uses this site only stayed at reviewed parks, we would never see new ones. So at least a couple times per year we try to stay in an unreviewed place so that we can add to the listings.
RLM
I do a couple of small commercial websites and business Facebook sites. My wife runs a small in home business. We have learned, painfully so, that one cannot please everyone all of the time despite our absolute best effort to do so. We bend over backwards for those that have legitimate concerns. But, it's a fact that there are just plain grumpy people out there that would complain if you gave them everything free and served it on a silver platter. Which by the way, this website is free to use. I suspect that 99.9% of the reviewers are pleased with the service that this site provides. For the other .1% perhaps an occasional chill pill would do no harm.
jimnkaran
I am new to this website but really like any site with campground reviews. I was going to post on a couple of places we have stayed but according to the rules I am not allowed to post a review on any campground. The reason is I have worked at a campground, Glacier National Park, as a campground host and the rules you must agree to when posting a review is that you have NEVER WORKED AT ANY CAMPGROUND!!! This is completely wrong. I agree that I should not be allowed to post a review at any campgrounds that I have worked at but I should be allowed to post on other campgrounds we stay at when traveling. I feel like this is not right just because I worked at one, my opinion should still count on other campgrounds.
docj
FWIW, I never noticed that the "affirmation" was stated in such a blanket manner until you pointed it out and I'm pretty sure that the intent of whoever wrote it was to assure that reviewers didn't have any relationships with the CG's they were reviewing. I have been a work-kamper and yet I write reviews and I'm sure that is true of many other folks who are members and contribute. We welcome you to the site and encourage you to post reviews.
Emma
QUOTE(mdcamping @ Dec 29 2012, 10:51 AM) *

X2

Mike


X2 (for the "Right on pianotuna! smile.gif " post)

EmmaMae
DXSMac
Um..... I think you can't post on a campground you are currently employed at. But any others you can post a review on..... But it might be a different story for a campground OWNER.



QUOTE(jimnkaran @ Apr 5 2013, 07:37 PM) *

I am new to this website but really like any site with campground reviews. I was going to post on a couple of places we have stayed but according to the rules I am not allowed to post a review on any campground. The reason is I have worked at a campground, Glacier National Park, as a campground host and the rules you must agree to when posting a review is that you have NEVER WORKED AT ANY CAMPGROUND!!! This is completely wrong. I agree that I should not be allowed to post a review at any campgrounds that I have worked at but I should be allowed to post on other campgrounds we stay at when traveling. I feel like this is not right just because I worked at one, my opinion should still count on other campgrounds.

jimnkaran
QUOTE(DXSMac @ Apr 10 2013, 09:25 AM) *

Um..... I think you can't post on a campground you are currently employed at. But any others you can post a review on..... But it might be a different story for a campground OWNER.

I have gotten advice from 2 so called senior members that say I can review campgrounds that I have been to but evidently they don't read the rules. Here is the quote that you must agree to before posting.
" I hereby state that I have read and will abide by the instructions listed above when writing my review. I am not currently nor have I ever been the owner, a relative of the owner, or an employee of this or any other RV park or campground. Furthermore I do not currently have nor have I ever had any affiliation with this or any other RV park or campground. I also give my permission for RV Park Reviews and/or campground Reviews to log my IP address when submitting this review. "
The statement above is very explicit as far as who can post. Not only does it exempt me from reviewing because I was a work camper but also about 13 years ago I owned a small campground and that also makes me ineligible to post reviews. Someone needs to tell the owners of the website how many people they are stopping from posting. And also anyone that falls into any of those categories and still post could be legally liable for anything they post. Evidently very few people read the rules they agree to when they check the little box to post.
Texasrvers
I will try to get a clarification from the webmaster.
Texasrvers
I think you will now find that this statement has been reworded to more accurately reflect its intent.
Jerry S.
Back to the part of this thread that discussed the need to moderate the incoming reviews. I recently read a review of the Ameristar Vickburg (MS) RV Park. Except for calling the park "rundown" and not getting a 50Amp site until they threatened to leave, the reviewer said little about the RV park. In fact, they actually wrote "I guess my rating is based not so much on the park as on Vicksburg itself". That's just wrong.
docj
QUOTE(Jerry S. @ Apr 29 2013, 12:10 AM) *

Back to the part of this thread that discussed the need to moderate the incoming reviews. I recently read a review of the Ameristar Vickburg (MS) RV Park. Except for calling the park "rundown" and not getting a 50Amp site until they threatened to leave, the reviewer said little about the RV park. In fact, they actually wrote "I guess my rating is based not so much on the park as on Vicksburg itself". That's just wrong.


I agree that the review you have cited should not have been posted as written. I know that this website uses volunteer reviewers who do their best to ensure that posted reviews adhere to site standards. However, as is the case with any activity involving multiple individuals exercising subjective evaluations, no two reviewers have exactly the same standards for acceptable review content.

I'm sure that your post pointing out the deficiencies of this review will result in it being re-evaluated and, most likely, being revised. IMHO bringing your concerns to the attention of the administrative team was very appropriate.
jamarynn1
Speaking of odd reasons to downgrade a park, I was just looking today at a review that gave the campground a "1" rating. One of the reasons given was that the "camper doors faced north". Over the years, I'm sure my camper door has faced in all four directions and every point in between. I guess I don't spend a lot of time being concerned about which direction it faces. I'm happy as long as it isn't facing "down" or "up".
Fitzjohnfan
QUOTE(jamarynn1 @ Apr 29 2013, 12:16 PM) *

Speaking of odd reasons to downgrade a park, I was just looking today at a review that gave the campground a "1" rating. One of the reasons given was that the "camper doors faced north". Over the years, I'm sure my camper door has faced in all four directions and every point in between. I guess I don't spend a lot of time being concerned about which direction it faces. I'm happy as long as it isn't facing "down" or "up".


I read that review also, and scratched my head as to the "doors North" comment and also the very low rating given. All the other recent ratings were glowing for that park, so this is one of those most of us will "bloop" over, chalking it up to a confused camper.
HappiestCamper
QUOTE(Fitzjohnfan @ Apr 29 2013, 03:40 PM) *

I read that review also, and scratched my head as to the "doors North" comment and also the very low rating given. All the other recent ratings were glowing for that park, so this is one of those most of us will "bloop" over, chalking it up to a confused camper.


This one got discussed a lot at rv.net, and it was surmised that since it was January, maybe the cold north wind was a problem.

Or maybe their tin foil helmet doesn't align well with magnetic north when the door faces that direction.
RLM
QUOTE(HappiestCamper @ Apr 30 2013, 07:58 AM) *

This one got discussed a lot at rv.net, and it was surmised that since it was January, maybe the cold north wind was a problem.


Wow! The reviewer got nationwide negative attention with that one. Perhaps it could serve as a good lesson for them, and maybe others, to be careful in what one says in a review. The Rules for Submitting a review do say to concentrate on the facilities, amenities, and services. They may not have been read.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.