Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Changes To Review Submittals
RV Park Reviews Campground Discussion Forum > RV Park and Campground Discussions > RV Park Discussions
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
gwbrown
i need to buy a dinghy to tow behind my 40' diesel. i am torn between the new Dodge Nitro and the Jeep Liberty. any suggestions, as i am new to motorhoming. thanks Gary
leftyf
QUOTE(Butch @ Oct 2 2007, 01:38 PM) *

Kitten4762,

After looking through over 1800 reviews, I only found two written under "Kitten4762".
1) Gatewood Park & Reservoir, and 2) Oceanlakes Family Campground. You state that you had three, but the third one is not showing on the list, what happen ?? I don't know. Re-post the third one again, if it takes it that will show that for some reason it was kicked out. Just trying to help, good luck.


I did the same thing. Whenever I posted it always told me that I had only posted two. I poated 5. Today it says I haven't posted any.

You need to abuse your webmaster a little cause he's letting stuff slip thru the crack.
Webmaster
lefty - I'm seeing 4 reviews from you, all online and active.

others:

If you see the message saying you have posted x of 3 required reviews, and the review you have just attempted to submit is still showing on the screen, then you need to scroll down and look for the stuff highlighted in pink, as their is a problem with your submission.

If you get the message saying x of 3 along with a Thank you message, your review has been submitted and is online.


I think many people are seeing the 0 of x message, and the system has a problem with their review. Unless you see the thank you, your review is NOT complete.

Please give it another shot. The system works or we wouldn't have over 38000 reviews online!

No webmaster abuse necessary!
Browzin
Personally I feel that the Webmaster has done a fantastic job biggrin.gif , even if some minor problems do crop up from time to time. You have to remember that some one had to review those 38,000 plus reviews and that takes time and dedicated effort. Instead of abusing some one that is working very hard to offer you a "FREE" service, how about appreciating and understanding the time & effort that the webmaster is putting forth.
Butch
Browzin,

We agree with you, and say, thank you. Very well put.
kitten4762
My reviews were finally posted. I had to go back and rewrite the third review and it took a couple of times of trying to resubmit it before it actually took. There were no spelling errors, etc. that I'm aware of so I have no idea what the problem was... but they are posted now. Thanks to all for their encouraging words.
weighit
I make a point of letting the campground know right up front that I used the reviews to find them, and because of what I read, I'm spending my money with them. Some parks don't even know that the site exists, and others are well aware that many people use this site. Many owners or managers are using this information to improve there parks and business, and then there are others that just don't get it. They will eventually be loosing a lot of their business from this wonderful tool.
DXSMac
QUOTE(weighit @ Nov 3 2007, 07:06 PM) *

I make a point of letting the campground know right up front that I used the reviews to find them, and because of what I read, I'm spending my money with them. Some parks don't even know that the site exists, and others are well aware that many people use this site. Many owners or managers are using this information to improve there parks and business, and then there are others that just don't get it. They will eventually be loosing a lot of their business from this wonderful tool.


If the webmaster promises not to shoot me..... there are two other campground review sites that take reviews from us common folk. However, this one is the most comprehensive. The other two sites don't have as many reviews as this one does. The other two sites don't have the "questionnaire" with the review. You just write and send it in. The other two sites don't have the "forum" that this one does. I like this forum.

JJ
Carly
I have been posting on here for quite a while (couple of years anyway) but none of the reviews I've sent in within the last month have been posted. Are they not getting through?
ddbradley952
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 five (5) 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.


****RE: Unscrupulous Campground operators!****
[size=5]

Ok, folks, (and pretty ladies too), it goes like this. If some "One In a Million" unscrupulous campground operator decides one day to be clever and start posting Rave reviews across the internet about themselves, we probably do not need to get our undies bunched up because in theory, the truth will eventually come forth and set the record straight resulting in backfire.

First of all, the only people who will see the reviews (either valid or in question) would be limited to people who read this site IE, you and I. Then, supposing the review enticed one of us to visit their place, then I or we would compare the information given and probably feel compelled to re-write a new (and possibly different) review, thus invalidating any false reviews.

Works both ways, too. Suppose someone wrote "False and Derogatory" information against an honest and hardworking Campground owner? Well, once again, this hopefully should backfire because I there might be a few of us others out here who, like myself, make it a point sometimes to go out of our way to visit these types of places just to see if it really is that bad!

Since I drive an older (but extremely clean) rig, I sometimes fit in with the older crowds.

It takes all kinds to make the world go around and some might feel exactly the oposite (or the same) way about a place in terms of what they likes/dislikes.


Apreciate your feedback by the way.
reddie
We found out about this website on RV.net. We have made two long trips this year, and we found ourselves looking for the park on this website, as we planned our trip from destination to destination. When we got home we decided to join, because we, having gotten a "heads up" before going to a particular park probably saved us a lot of grief trying to get our 40' rig through. We also avoided hanging limbs and scratches. Although Trailer Life is good, and the descriptions of campgrounds OK, it is still more informative reading experiences of fellow RV'ers. Unfortunately, as happened at the KOA in Gretna/Omaha, we paid over $50.00 for a space our rig hardly fit in.

As for posting again if we stay at an RV park a second and third time--I think it's a good idea. Campgrounds change owners, and things change and are updated. With us posting reviews, I think it may improve conditions in campgrounds and parks. Some interior roads are very bad, tree limbs need to be trimmed, and the utilities are falling apart.

This forum can cause positive change. If a campground improves, then we should write another review. If it goes downhill, we should write another review. I believe that just letting their campgrounds go (not keeping interior roads and hook ups in good condition) won't cut it anymore. With the internet, forums like this, and RV.net can either hurt or help their business.
reddie
Another note: I totally agree with the above member who posted that he looks up other campgrounds when he gets to his destination. We also ride through other campgrounds when we get to a destination. (for example: while in Custer, South Dakota we visited every campground there. When we go back we will not stay in the campground that we stayed in.

I believe unscrupulous campground owners will be caught, as long as we as members attempt to do fair reviews on all the campgrounds and parks we visit. With a majority posting, anything phoney will stand out more.

Good idea on telling the park owner that we found them on this web site when we check in.
ddbradley952
QUOTE(reddie @ Dec 3 2007, 10:06 PM) *

Another note: I totally agree with the above member who posted that he looks up other campgrounds when he gets to his destination. We also ride through other campgrounds when we get to a destination. (for example: while in Custer, South Dakota we visited every campground there. When we go back we will not stay in the campground that we stayed in.

I believe unscrupulous campground owners will be caught, as long as we as members attempt to do fair reviews on all the campgrounds and parks we visit. With a majority posting, anything phoney will stand out more.

Good idea on telling the park owner that we found them on this web site when we check in.



People seem to be making a bigger deal than they should regarding the potential possibility that some reviews may actually not be from campers themselves, but rather unscrupulous campground operators. Chances are, it's only 1 in a million and there is an equal one in a million chance that a cg review was full of B.S. from a legitimate camper who has different tastes than the rest of the world. They might be from another planet altogether, like Ted Kazinski, the sociopathic unabomber.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE REAL SOLUTION to this potential problem WHICH WE DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE IF IT REALLY EVEN EXISTS, is really quite simple. ALLOW Camp Ground OPERATORS TO BE PART OF OUR DISCUSSION HERE.dON'T EXCLUDE THEM, they are important human beings too. Modify the website to allow for this. If you noticed that after every review there is a sentence that says; "I CAMPED HERE IN A ______ TYPE UNIT.

How about something like this; (I.T. folks will understand and apreciate this) ADD AN OPTION in this box which could say something else like: "I did not camp here, I am the authorized spoksperson for this location. Allow them to state only factual statements and not candy coated opinions. This would remove the need to be unscrupulous and sneaky in the first place.

Consider this point; imagine if you were a small business owner and your small business was the pride and joy of your life, and imagine a world where absolutely any one person on the plannet were allowed to write derogatory information against your business and defame your reputation permenantly and you never were given ANY OPPORTUNITY to defend or explain yourself or your side of the story, no chance to speak, not allowed to reply, you just had to eat crow pie, like it or not. Seems rather un-American to me and I would resent this and I think any small owner would be outraged. I know I would. I personally like to get the whole story, not just half of the truth, because then I can make a more intelegent decision because I have twice as much information. Anyone ever falsly acused should see my point about what is right or wrong.

If you agree with this point I am trying to make, do the world (or me and you) a favor and send a little feedback to the web-master suggesting the benifits of this type of modification. It only makes sense, It seems more fair. The other detail could include limiting the reviews identified as being posted by a CG operator, limiting them from writing about any other campgrounds and allowing them an exception to get their information posted without having to write reviews of other campgrounds. I have a feeling that the webmaster of this site is only doing this as a hobby. I kind of like Woodalls because it doesn't seem like a gossip circle. More objective in my opinion.
wpr
If there is any doubt about "unscrupulous campground owners" making unjustified posts about their own or their competitors campgrounds, have a look at the postings for Plattsburg, NY. Check out the "other reviews posted" for each one. Some people have posted only reviews of the two competing campgrounds, ex. 3 extremely positive of one and 3 extremely negative of the other....
FosterImposters
--------------------
'reddie' date='Dec 3 2007:
This forum can cause positive change. If a campground improves, then we should write another review. If it goes downhill, we should write another review. I believe that just letting their campgrounds go (not keeping interior roads and hook ups in good condition) won't cut it anymore. With the internet, forums like this, and RV.net can either hurt or help their business.
---------------------

Good points! We totally agree. Thanks for joining in.
stanbnv
I wish I had read this before I posted about my favorite campground in Mexico. I wouldn't have taken the time! So long RV Park reviews, you are off my favorites list. mad.gif
Webmaster
QUOTE(stanbnv @ Mar 16 2008, 10:32 AM) *

I wish I had read this before I posted about my favorite campground in Mexico. I wouldn't have taken the time! So long RV Park reviews, you are off my favorites list. mad.gif


Actually Stan the standard listed in the original version of this thread said 5 reviews, that was only the case for a few weeks. We relaxed this to 3 reviews a long long time ago, and I plan to remove this limit completely at some point in the near future.

inkd4life
This is a great site. I just started camping in April of 2007, when we baught our first travel trailer. I was keeping a notebook in the camper and writing down my review for each campground, then I found this site so I just wrote 11 different reviews.
FosterImposters
Welcome aboard Inkd4life biggrin.gif
We had been doing the notebook thing as well...and happened onto this site trying to Google information about an RV resort in out-of-way community of Aguanga, California.
Love the organization of this site as opposed to the hap-hazard methods to gain a park review at RV.net or iRV2.com.

Just today handed an RV neighbor a copy of the download 'ad' from this site...as he'd never heard of us. Pass the word! Cheers!
cool.gif
csvreno
QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 4 2006, 08:18 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.

It's too bad that a security feature is needed. Unfortunately, it makes a sad sense. I'd hate to get suckered into a crummy park at the end of a long day, such as under the railroad tracks; it happened once in Eugene, OR. Thanks for a valuable resource.
HarrietLD
QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 4 2006, 11:18 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.




QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 4 2006, 11:18 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.


hi...
i am a bit confused - do i need to submit three or five reviews before my reviews are accepted and available online?
thanks for your help.
dsmith6282
mad.gif
Sorry but in times of the cost of gas and pulling a trailer I think we sould be able to post what is found in the parks we can afford to visit and to see the ones to stay clear of. Soryy but I know I will not be able to afford 5 parks every year anymore wish I could tho.
D Smith
HarrietLD
QUOTE(HarrietLD @ May 11 2008, 12:33 PM) *

hi...
i am a bit confused - do i need to submit three or five reviews before my reviews are accepted and available online?
thanks for your help.



biggrin.gif ok, so it is five reviews we have to send before any are accepted? is there a way to look back at the reviews i have sent? tried the help screen but could not find how to do that. i sent in two from 2007 - hoe that was ok.
Texasrvers
I can tell you that right now it is only 3 reviews that have to be submitted, but the webmaster has said he might lift this in the future (if he hasn't already). I do not know how you can look back to see what you've done. Maybe someone else can answer that question.
HarrietLD
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ May 11 2008, 09:07 PM) *

I can tell you that right now it is only 3 reviews that have to be submitted, but the webmaster has said he might lift this in the future (if he hasn't already). I do not know how you can look back to see what you've done. Maybe someone else can answer that question.


thanks for the infomation. i have sent five, but have not seen any of them as yet.

QUOTE(HarrietLD @ May 11 2008, 09:13 PM) *

thanks for the infomation. i have sent five, but have not seen any of them as yet.


just checked - my reviews are no appearing. also, i realized that if i click on one of the reviews i can have access to the others i have written.
HarrietLD
QUOTE(HarrietLD @ May 11 2008, 09:15 PM) *

thanks for the infomation. i have sent five, but have not seen any of them as yet.
just checked - my reviews are no appearing. also, i realized that if i click on one of the reviews i can have access to the others i have written.
wink.gif
Cheryl
QUOTE
Sorry but in times of the cost of gas and pulling a trailer I think we sould be able to post what is found in the parks we can afford to visit and to see the ones to stay clear of. Soryy but I know I will not be able to afford 5 parks every year anymore wish I could tho.
D Smith

You don't have to stay in 5 parks every year. You do have to post 3 reviews (it could be 1 a year or 1 every other year or 2 this year 1 next, etc). Your reviews will stay in the waiting stage until you reach the 3.
Texasrvers
HarrietLD,

You just said that your reviews are not appearing, but then you said you can click on one of your reviews and see the others. If you can see them doesn't that mean they have been posted? I thought you were asking how to see them if they are still on hold. I know you can look back at the ones that have been posted, but I do not know how to see them if they are still in the holding stage.
HarrietLD
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ May 11 2008, 10:57 PM) *

HarrietLD,

You just said that your reviews are not appearing, but then you said you can click on one of your reviews and see the others. If you can see them doesn't that mean they have been posted? I thought you were asking how to see them if they are still on hold. I know you can look back at the ones that have been posted, but I do not know how to see them if they are still in the holding stage.



sorry for the confusion - i think i am set now. thanks for your help.
rodeo1
QUOTE(BBear @ Jul 17 2006, 06:21 PM) *

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 absolutly dissagree. for crying out loud, you do five reviews the first week of a two week trip. if you can't come up with five simple reviews in your camping life i doubt you have the r.v. ing experience to be doing a review of an r.v. park anyway.

be offended and flame away, i think the administrator is correct.

now, if we can just get him to post all ratings and not pull the ones he doesn't agree with.

i rated a park in calif. just to warn other motorcyclists the park was NOT motorcycle friendly. it was never posted. i guess the administrator isn't "motorcycle friendly" either.
rodman
QUOTE(rodeo1 @ May 23 2008, 09:41 AM) *

i absolutly dissagree. for crying out loud, you do five reviews the first week of a two week trip. if you can't come up with five simple reviews in your camping life i doubt you have the r.v. ing experience to be doing a review of an r.v. park anyway.

be offended and flame away, i think the administrator is correct.

now, if we can just get him to post all ratings and not pull the ones he doesn't agree with.

i rated a park in calif. just to warn other motorcyclists the park was NOT motorcycle friendly. it was never posted. i guess the administrator isn't "motorcycle friendly" either.

I just read a review of a park that was not motorcycle friendly, just in the last week I believe. It was a coastal park I think. Which one was it. I don't think they pull them if they don't agree, I really don't think the webmaster has a personal interest in any of the parks.

Just my opinion,
rodeo1
QUOTE(rodman @ May 23 2008, 01:31 PM) *

I just read a review of a park that was not motorcycle friendly, just in the last week I believe. It was a coastal park I think. Which one was it. I don't think they pull them if they don't agree, I really don't think the webmaster has a personal interest in any of the parks.

Just my opinion,

i absolutly apologize ! i just checked and you are correct, it did get posted. a thousand pardons, i will learn to check before putting my keyboard in gear. this is the most valuable website on the internet for someone who travels as much as i do.

QUOTE(rodeo1 @ May 23 2008, 02:19 PM) *

i absolutly apologize ! i just checked and you are correct, it did get posted. a thousand pardons, i will learn to check before putting my keyboard in gear. this is the most valuable website on the internet for someone who travels as much as i do.

sorry, you did ask, didn't you ? its a park in half moon bay, calif.
Denali
One reason that some reviews are never posted is that they are in either all lower or all upper case, and the moderators would need to retype much of the text to make them readable.

When submitting a review, please read the "Review Notice" that appears before you can post. It asks that you check your spelling and punctuation, avoid using either all lower case or all upper case, etc. Reviews that require extensive editing to make them readable have little chance of getting posted.
ddbradley952
[quote name='ddbradley952' date='Dec 4 2007, 02:45 AM' post='9346']
I personally believe some of you may be over reacting over the idea that some ratings might be posted by camp ground operators themselves.
There is a greater potential that the reviews were not, because most camp grounds operators simply are not that clever, probably never even heard about this site, don't have time for the B.S., are too busy, and may already be rated directly through a site such as Woodall's or Good Sam who personally inspects many campgrounds they inspect. Either way, this site is simply a guild, not a know it all site. Most negative reviews have little or no impact at all on a campgrounds bottom line at the end of the day (if you build it, people will come) but rather allows angry campers to blow off steam to the cyber world.

As a solution to to this concern, several others have suggested that the web master restructure the reviewing process all together by ALLOWING instead of EXCLUDING camp grounds operators in the posting process. They also should be ALLOWED to RESPOND to COMPLAINTS and be given DUE PROCESS in America much like how the Better Business Bureau does it. I personally believe that if a camp ground operator discovers a derogotory report out there that they should be offered a chance to explain their side so we have the complete story instead of just half the story.

I'm willing to bet that many people who camp understand Business and understand this CONCEPT. If I were a Camp Grounds operator and some site was allowing people so defame my good reputation and assassinate my good character with out having a chance to correct the situation I would seriously consider my litigation options like they do in Hollywood California. KWIM IGGY?

See if the web master posts or deletes this article...
DXSMac
Actually, I have run into campground owners who *are* "smart enough" to read this site. There was one in Sequim, WA I stayed at. I mentioned RVparkreviews.com, and that their park got mostly positive reviews except for ONE negative. The owner mentioned that they do read this site, and "they knew who the negative person was...." The park owner explained their side of that "negative" review.

Also, I personally know another park manager/owner who reads this site. I'm not going to reveal what their ID is.

Plus, we have seen another park owner/manager on this site who told us all that they were a park manager/owner, "Parkview" or something like that....

Ok, that's three I know of......

JJ
rvgirl42
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.
mdcamping
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

DXSMac
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
Texasrvers
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.
mdcamping
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
genekatt
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
Dave-and-Ellen
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.
jmc1205
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.
ttg
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.
Dragonfly
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
kjh
[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????
DXSMac
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
ldr1992
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!)
mch2464
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?

mch2464
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.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.