Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Review Submittal Policy
RV Park Reviews Campground Discussion Forum > RV Park and Campground Discussions > RV Park Discussions
RTA
As a new member, I am unsure of the policy regarding submitting a review. I have read the section "How to Submit a Review" but it appears that a member has to submit a minimum of 3 reviews before they will be considered. This criteria or policy was stated in a post back in 2006. I cannot find any current information as to whether or not this policy is still in effect. I would have thought that if it were, it would have been included in the "How to Submit a Review" section of the forum.

I am a bit of a loss as to why a member has to submit a minimum of 3 reviews before they will be considered. Apparently, it has something to do with "security" but the security of "what" or "who"?? Is a single review not worthy or legitimate?

Just recently, we visited an RV park and I did spend some time and effort and wrote a review of this campground and submitted it. I was a bit puzzled as to why it took so long to appear but by sheer accident, I found this policy "buried" in amongst several pages of posts about reviews.

I realize there has to be some guidelines or criteria concerning reviews but I would suggest that it would help new members if these submission rules were "up front and center" so that they are easily accessed and better understood. Can they not be included in the "How to Submit a Review" sticky?

It could take us quite some time to visit 3 or more RV parks. In addition to taking a rather lengthy time for the review to appear (in excess of 2 weeks apparently), this 3 review minimum is not really "user friendly" and involves an unreasonable length of time.

I would appreciate an explanation regarding the 3 review minimum criteria and its impact on "security".

Thank you
docj
The 3-review requirement was added a number of years ago as a mechanism to reduce the number of "fake" reviews submitted by park owners and their friends. It is, admittedly, a weak mechanism, since nothing stops such individuals from submitting reviews of other parks as well as their own, but it does seem to reduce the number of such reviews.

We're sorry if this is an inconvenience to you, we find that most RVers stay at more than enough parks in the course of a season to quickly meet this requirement. Remember, you only have to meet it once, your 4th and subsequent reviews are not delayed.

As for the delay in posting reviews this summer, there have been numerous questions asked about that in other threads on this forum. We have been honest that this has been the website's most successful year to date, and with that has come a deluge of submissions that has somewhat swamped our staff. The backlog has been reduced significantly reduced and we are hoping to be completely caught up shortly.
dalsgal
RTA, The initial 3 reviews does seem to help cut down on fake posts. It can be difficult sometimes but it does help. As for the delay with reviews showing there is a very good reason for that. All the reviews must be checked out before thy are posted and everyone that does that is a volunteer. During the summer, with so many people visiting RV parks, it can take a while for all reviews to be posted. Sometimes it does seem slow but these volunteers do a fantastic job of keeping this site to the high standards it has.
RTA
Thank you for your prompt response in answer to my question and concerns. While I agree that campground owners who stoop so low as to posting a "review" of their own facility would be a concern, I am wondering if there is some other way around this problem rather than making it more difficult for the member who wishes to submit only 1 or 2 reviews.

As a Canadian who does spend a considerable amount of time in our Provincial and other privately-owned campsites, I may not camp at 3 different US sites this year so as to "qualify" to have any review I might want to make accepted by your review committee.

I realize that this site as well as many other RV sites are staffed by volunteers. I am one myself so I appreciate their work and the time they put into ensuring that the site runs smoothly and efficiently. My major concern is not with the volunteers and the job they do.

As I suggested earlier, I think it would make an improvement for new members if there was more information about posting in the PLEASE READ STICKY about How to Post. Directions are great but including the 3 review requirement, the reasons behind that and any other helpful information would assist in clearing up any confusion and help the new member understand the "why" behind the policies and rules. New members should not have to go on a hunt for this information nor should they find out about it by chance.

A better-informed member is a happy one. Your explanations were great but if I had been able to see this right away I wouldn't have to write this and you wouldn't have to answer. We're both saving time and effort.

Again, thanks for clearing some things up.

Texasrvers
QUOTE(RTA @ Aug 18 2014, 05:31 PM) *



As a Canadian who does spend a considerable amount of time in our Provincial and other privately-owned campsites, I may not camp at 3 different US sites this year so as to "qualify" to have any review I might want to make accepted by your review committee.


Whoa, wait a minute. Nowhere is there any statement about the reviews having to be for US sites. We have thousands of reviews for Canadian parks, and if you are spending a considerable amount of time in your Provincial and other privately-owned campsites in Canada, you should easily be able to meet our 3 review rule.
docj
I've already submitted reviews of 5 Canadian RV Parks this summer. We definitely don't have reviews of nearly the same percentage of Canadian parks as we have of those in the US. We'd greatly appreciate your help.
RTA
My bad! Apologies are in order. I neglected to see the Canadian flag and the reviews for sites in Canada for each province. wacko.gif
Texasrvers
No problem. Just glad we got it clarified.
GaryWT
I did not realize the three review rule was still in place. I just read a review and the link under it said click here to see the 1 other review from this reviewer and both reviews were from this year. I have read some recently that it was their one and only review.

On another note, seems like the back log is caught up, I had a review that took over 2 weeks to post the other day and now a review from yesterday is posted already as well. Good work.
NYDutch
Gary, as I recall from previous posts about the three review rule, sometimes a person submits the required three reviews, but one or two of them are not posted due to being too old or not meeting some other rules standard, but that still qualifies them to have the one good review posted.
Fitzjohnfan
QUOTE(Dutch_12078 @ Aug 19 2014, 07:06 AM) *

Gary, as I recall from previous posts about the three review rule, sometimes a person submits the required three reviews, but one or two of them are not posted due to being too old or not meeting some other rules standard, but that still qualifies them to have the one good review posted.

Yes, that's why sometimes you will see a review, without a link at the bottom to the other reviews the user posted. The other two reviews they submitted did not qualify, or were deferred, yet the 3rd one was posted.
mdcamping
Though I'm not an IT guy, I would also bet some of those missing links on the new reviews are because the site hasn't been updated/backed up etc.

Mike
rkw99
Because people who have a reason to post a fake review (bone to pick with a park or vested interest) wouldn't take the time to post 3 fake reviews....LOL.

I found this out the first time I tried to submit a review and being that we rarely visit 3 or more parks in a year, I save my reviews for other websites.
docj
QUOTE(rkw99 @ Aug 27 2014, 01:45 PM) *

Because people who have a reason to post a fake review (bone to pick with a park or vested interest) wouldn't take the time to post 3 fake reviews....LOL.

I found this out the first time I tried to submit a review and being that we rarely visit 3 or more parks in a year, I save my reviews for other websites.


Despite your skepticism, we found that implementation of this policy did noticeably reduce the number of obviously false reviews.

As for your participation on our site, I think you have misunderstood the policy. You only have to submit the three reviews once. It is not a 3-review per year requirement. I'm not aware of anyone else who has felt this was an undue burden.
rkw99
QUOTE(docj @ Aug 27 2014, 04:47 PM) *

Despite your skepticism, we found that implementation of this policy did noticeably reduce the number of obviously false reviews.

As for your participation on our site, I think you have misunderstood the policy. You only have to submit the three reviews once. It is not a 3-review per year requirement. I'm not aware of anyone else who has felt this was an undue burden.


No, I understand the policy. I do not travel to 3 parks in any year. Therefore, unless I write some fake reviews of my own , I am unable to participate here. I considered doing so as I have been to many campgrounds over the years (just not all in one year). But I found other travel review websites that are less exclusive. It's fine, I'm not offended. Just amused by it.
docj
QUOTE(rkw99 @ Sep 4 2014, 02:11 PM) *

No, I understand the policy. I do not travel to 3 parks in any year. Therefore, unless I write some fake reviews of my own , I am unable to participate here. I considered doing so as I have been to many campgrounds over the years (just not all in one year). But I found other travel review websites that are less exclusive. It's fine, I'm not offended. Just amused by it.


I'll repeat myself once more at the risk of being redundant. You DO NOT have to stay in 3 campgrounds in one year to participate on this website. You could have submitted one review a year for 3 years and your reviews would have been posted after 3 had been submitted.

You could have easily participated on this website if you had wished to. Since you have found other sites to post on that's fine too. I'm sure they appreciate your reviews.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.