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
Denali
QUOTE(MATurner @ Jun 20 2013, 07:55 PM) *

I'm a bit dismayed by this whole situation. I've written and had placed in the forum many reviews of campgrounds and have NEVER been denied a review. I stayed in a campground for two nights and wrote what I felt was an accurate review of the campground speaking of the false advertising and the problems we encountered at the campground. We are on a 3 month trip and have more than 30 reservations made for this trip. I cannot for the life of me figure out why my review was "deferred" except that I gave said campground a low rating compared to others who had reviewed it. I also mentioned a few positives. The only one being that they had spacious sites. If the campground advertises certain things and doesn't deliver, we should be able to advise fellow travelers so they won't have the same problem. I just cannot figure out what was wrong with my review.

Can you copy and paste your review here so we can all see what the issue(s) might have been?
Texasrvers
QUOTE(MATurner @ Jun 21 2013, 01:18 AM) *

No, it did not.


First, all deferral emails that are sent to the reviewer have a reason listed along with some standardized comments to explain the reason. An admin may choose to add more individualized comments to further clarify your particular deferral. In fact, the subject line of the email contains the name of the reason, so you did get one, even if the admin in your case chose not make any further comments.

Second, as docj said, I think the “Newbie” term refers to your posts, not reviews, and until you began this line of posts yesterday, you had only 2 posts. I would imagine that is what has kept your newbie status.

Finally, Denali, has an excellent suggestion. None of us can accurately say what was wrong with your review until we know what was in it. If you prefer to keep you review anonymous (out of the forum), you can send it to me using our Personal Message system.
PtM
I've used RVParkReviews for many years now but have not participated in this forum.
A couple questions and then my comments if I may..
How does one communicate to the Admin folks directly or is this the place to do it?
Truthfulness in rating parks can be achieved in a positive manner I believe.
I do think we could all use a better definition from Admin of the basis for which we make the overall rating as it is very subjective by nature and could help us all from a quality control standpoint. I would also find it helpful in some of the checkmark areas had more than just a yes or no. For example, "Clean Restroom" would be more descriptive if there were three categories such as outstanding, clean, and not clean. A 20 year old clean restroom is not the same as a brand new facility meticulously maintained. Yes, maybe this could be addressed in the comments area but trying to do so without being negative is difficult.

It would be helpful to include a "value received" check area so folks don't give an average campground a 10 just because they saved a few dollars. Sometimes we do need to pay for the value received.

I've found RVParkReviews very helpful. But, due to what I refer to as frequent over-ratings either by we users or campground owners, I find it necessary to triple check other sources in an attempt to get a true picture. I often do not rate a park I've stayed at when the ratings are accurate. I do however make it a point to attempt to even out the picture of parks I stay at that have been in my opinion overrated.

Last week I chose a facility that had two 10s compared to one three miles down the road with 7s and 8s. I felt sucked in by the 10s as the two facilities were nearly identical. From outward appearances the one I didn't use appeared more spacious and so forth. There is no way to say that without getting your rating rejected by Admin so as a user, how can I trust the overall rating system unless there are more specific guidelines to same.

So Admin, if you read this stuff, I thank you for a great site and the many helpful ratings users have posted. I just wish there was a way to share our concerns when we feel a park has been substantially over rated.
Texasrvers
Hello PtM,

Yes, we read these messages, and in answer to your question it is appropriate to post here, or you can click on the “Contact Us” button at the bottom of each page.

Thank you for your comments, and you are quite correct: An overall rating is (and always will be) very subjective. Our members are not professional reviewers, nor do we expect them to be. The things that one member likes about a park may be totally unsatisfactory to another. If a person likes to camp in the woods, he may rate a place with concrete pads and manicured landscaping much lower than a place in a very natural setting , and vice versa. This is also why some people feel parks are sometimes “overrated,” when in fact it is simply a case of one reviewer liking what the place has to offer a lot more than another reviewer. If the park meets a reviewer’s needs, likes, and wants, then it is appropriate for him to give a higher rating. If the next reviewer does not find a park to his liking, he should give a lower score. And yes, it is always good to get as much information about a place as you can so that you are not sucked in by reviews that are higher or lower than the rating you would give the place.

Related to the above, this is why we like for reviewers to give a lot of specific, factual, (hopefully objective) information about the park itself: What it looks like; What the sites are like; How the utilities worked; What amenities are available; etc. It is these descriptions that give readers a much better/bigger picture than a simple “yes” or “no” or a 5 rating. Therefore, to say something like “the bathrooms were clean, but were old” is very appropriate and helpful (and not necessarily negative), and I have seen comments such as this many times.

Also along these same lines, we have considered adding more items to the check list and/or expanding the descriptions to more than just yes/no answers. However, our thinking has always been that we want to stick to the basics and keep this list simple for reviewers so that they will not become bogged down trying to answer numerous questions. We feel that most reviewers will gladly check off a few items, but many would not take the time to submit a review if there were a long list.

Comments about our rating system, its short comings, and ways to improve it should be posted here, not in a review. We really do try to insure that reviews are about the park itself. We also do not allow reviewers to comment on a second park or to compare parks. To be fair to all parks, a review should be for one park only. I am guessing your review contained a lot of these types of comments, and was not really about the park that the review was for, and that is probably why your “rating was rejected by Admin.”

Finally, as for wishing “there was a way to share our concerns when we feel a park have been substantially over rated,” all you need to do is submit a review that tells about the park you stayed at and why you felt it deserved the rating you gave it. You can even say that you feel the park has been over rated by others, but then you should cite your reasons why. In this way, you have presented you opinion just like other reviewers have, and readers will then have diverse views to choose from.
MATurner
QUOTE(docj @ Jun 21 2013, 09:36 AM) *

The term "newbie" isn't anything more than a label used by the forum's software to describe someone who doesn't have many forum posts. It has nothing to do with your posts on the website. It's nothing more than a machine applying a category; it's not a put-down.

As for the Carlsbad KOA, this park repeatedly gets negative comments from people who stayed there only to discover that it is further away from the Caverns than they realized. IMHO the park doesn't conceal its location on its website and even provides maps. If someone chooses to stay there and then finds the drive to the Caverns longer than what they desired, why is that the park's fault? There's no bait and switch going on; the park is exactly where it said it is. Personally, I consider downgrading the park's rating for that to be totally inappropriate, but I am not the admin who deferred your review.


My negative review of the park was more about the park itself than the distance. However, I just looked in the KOA book, and it says nothing about how far it is from the Caverns. It wasn't until checking in, we found out about the hour drive. It should be called nowhere land KOA, rather than Carlsbad, because it could as easily be Artesia KOA. Do you work there? ohmy.gif But, you are right, they didn't conceal they were nearly an hour away when we CHECKED in. Since we'd already paid, it was a bit late to be told. I don't give bad reviews for driving distance. That's ridiculous. I review the park. The fact it is so far away SHOULD be noted in the review, however, and it was.
docj
Not to belabor this discussion but this is the map on the Carlsbad KOA's website:

IPB Image

The words immediately above the map state:

Just off US Hwy 285 between mile markers 51 and 52. Located thirteen minutes north of Carlsbad and twelve minutes south of Artesia.

Judging by the map, I would take the distance from the CG to the Caverns to be at least twice the 13 minutes noted plus the time it takes to drive through Carlsbad. So a driving estimate of at least 45 minutes is reasonable.

I don't see how the park can be accused of being deceptive in its advertising. It very clearly states that it is located midway between Carlsbad and Artesia. Other than posting a big warning label on its website stating: We're not really located all that close to the Caverns! I have no idea how more open the CG can be about where it is located. Maybe what is needed is for people to read the information provided.

And to answer your question, no, I don't work at the CG or for KOA. I simply don't think it's fair to blame a business for customers failing to do their homework before making reservations.
MATurner
QUOTE(docj @ Jun 21 2013, 06:59 PM) *

Not to belabor this discussion but this is the map on the Carlsbad KOA's website:

IPB Image

The words immediately above the map state:

Just off US Hwy 285 between mile markers 51 and 52. Located thirteen minutes north of Carlsbad and twelve minutes south of Artesia.

Judging by the map, I would take the distance from the CG to the Caverns to be at least twice the 13 minutes noted plus the time it takes to drive through Carlsbad. So a driving estimate of at least 45 minutes is reasonable.

I don't see how the park can be accused of being deceptive in its advertising. It very clearly states that it is located midway between Carlsbad and Artesia. Other than posting a big warning label on its website stating: We're not really located all that close to the Caverns! I have no idea how more open the CG can be about where it is located. Maybe what is needed is for people to read the information provided.

And to answer your question, no, I don't work at the CG or for KOA. I simply don't think it's fair to blame a business for customers failing to do their homework before making reservations.



This is nuts. We were planning a 3 month trip. As I said, this review was not about driving distance. It was much more than that. I reviewed the awful park, our lack of power twice while we were there, the incredible amount of dust, the rude service by the man who brought us in, the dog park with green slime in the bowl and dogs without owners attending them, etc. I could go on and on, and you are dwelling on my lack of knowledge about an area in which I've never been. The ratings for this park are out of line in my opinion, and I stick to that. Have a good evening.
kcmoedoe
QUOTE(MATurner @ Jun 21 2013, 07:40 PM) *

This is nuts. We were planning a 3 month trip. As I said, this review was not about driving distance. It was much more than that. I reviewed the awful park, our lack of power twice while we were there, the incredible amount of dust, the rude service by the man who brought us in, the dog park with green slime in the bowl and dogs without owners attending them, etc. I could go on and on, and you are dwelling on my lack of knowledge about an area in which I've never been. The ratings for this park are out of line in my opinion, and I stick to that. Have a good evening.

By saying the ratings for the park are out of line, you are basically saying you are smarter and better than everyone else who posted a review. I don't believe this site has any problem with someone posting a review that is lower than all the other reviews. I often see parks with nothing but 10s and 9s suddenly have a 1 or 2 show up. But if in the review you call out all other reviewers by implying they were wrong when they rated the park, that review should be rejected because it is a direct attack on all those other reviewers, not the park.
dalsgal
QUOTE(PtM @ Jun 21 2013, 01:47 PM) *

I've used RVParkReviews for many years now but have not participated in this forum.


I've found RVParkReviews very helpful. But, due to what I refer to as frequent over-ratings either by we users or campground owners, I find it necessary to triple check other sources in an attempt to get a true picture. I often do not rate a park I've stayed at when the ratings are accurate. I do however make it a point to attempt to even out the picture of parks I stay at that have been in my opinion overrated.


I don't think you are being fair when you try to "even out" the ratings. What you see as a poor campground may be a better one in the eyes of someone else. You are telling other people that your opinion is more important, or better, than their opinion. It isn't your job to overrule someone else but your job to be honest with your ratings.
docj
QUOTE(PtM @ Jun 21 2013, 02:47 PM) *


I've found RVParkReviews very helpful. But, due to what I refer to as frequent over-ratings either by we users or campground owners, I find it necessary to triple check other sources in an attempt to get a true picture. I often do not rate a park I've stayed at when the ratings are accurate. I do however make it a point to attempt to even out the picture of parks I stay at that have been in my opinion overrated.



When I look at the reviews for a particular park I look at the average rating it has received and tend to discount both the very highs and lows. Personally, I would greatly appreciate it if you would write reviews of parks where you are simply "adding to the average" because that's what makes averaging a powerful tool. The more people who agree with a rating, the more likely it is to be the correct rating.

On the other hand, if you write a particularly negative review of a park for which the average review is much higher, I am likely to discount it as being from someone who simply had an atypical bad experience. If, on the other hand, is only slightly off the average then I will give it much more credence.
jamarynn1
I wish the OP would post his review so we can see it, but apparently he must have some reason for not doing so. I once had a review appear and then disappear. I tried to post again and got the message that I couldn't review the park again until a certain amount of time had passed, so obviously it HAD been there. I contacted a moderator, who couldn't find any trace of my original post. I have posted very uncomplimentary reviews and haven't had one rejected yet, as far as I know. This one was somewhat uncomplimentary but downright nice compared to some of the other ones for that park. At least I didn't call the owners Nazis. Things happen. We pull up our big girl (or boy) undies and we move on. I suggest the OP either post his review so it can be discussed or move on.
docj
Admins aren't supposed to defer reviews just because they are more negative than other reviews of the same CG. Sometimes we may question why a reviewer speaks so highly of a CG only to give it a "2" or a "3". But some reviewers are hard graders and may like a park, but on an absolute scale only rate it as a "6", for example.

All that is asked of reviewers is that they try to rate a park using criteria that the park has some reasonable control over. I've seen reviews that criticize CG's because "it rained the whole time we were here", because "the wind never stopped blowing", or because "the power went out due to the wind." In fact, reviews aren't usually deferred for such unfairness unless the reviewer goes "over the top" about the issue. laugh.gif
JDOLLEN
QUOTE(jamarynn1 @ Jun 22 2013, 06:43 PM) *

I wish the OP would post his review so we can see it, but apparently he must have some reason for not doing so. I once had a review appear and then disappear. I tried to post again and got the message that I couldn't review the park again until a certain amount of time had passed, so obviously it HAD been there. I contacted a moderator, who couldn't find any trace of my original post. I have posted very uncomplimentary reviews and haven't had one rejected yet, as far as I know. This one was somewhat uncomplimentary but downright nice compared to some of the other ones for that park. At least I didn't call the owners Nazis. Things happen. We pull up our big girl (or boy) undies and we move on. I suggest the OP either post his review so it can be discussed or move on.


I believe the review has been posted. If it is the one in question, it is not terribly negative. The writer has listed items that fell short of what he/she expected. Reading between the lines, and I'm only guessing, I suspect the issue may have been something about the opinions of other folks that left earlier reviews.

I happened to have been guilty of the same offense. I stayed at a park that had a lot of reviews with a lot of higher numbers. Instead of "reading" the reviews, I jumped to the conclusion that this would be a great park to stay at. In my opinion, it was a terrible park. But most of the negatives had been listed by previous posters and had I read them, probably would have passed on the park.

My first attempt to rate the park listed the negatives but also included a blast at other posters for giving the place such good reviews. It never got published. I resent a "watered down" version that did get published. Obviously, I was trying to blame others for my lack of due diligence. Do your homework and you should rarely be disappointed.

Darrell
dgjg
QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 4 2006, 10:18 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 three 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 three 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.

dry.gif I have met the quota but why have only my positive reviews shown up but none of my negative ones ? We travel a lot and have come across some bad parks that were rated good on this site and it makes me wonder ?
Texasrvers
QUOTE(dgjg @ Jul 8 2013, 09:30 PM) *

dry.gif I have met the quota but why have only my positive reviews shown up but none of my negative ones ? We travel a lot and have come across some bad parks that were rated good on this site and it makes me wonder ?


I cannot find any reviews submitted under the username dgjg. Did you submit them under a different name? If you will use our personal message system to send me your other username and the names of the parks that you reviewed that do have a review posted, I will be glad to look into it.
docj
QUOTE(dgjg @ Jul 8 2013, 10:30 PM) *

dry.gif I have met the quota but why have only my positive reviews shown up but none of my negative ones ? We travel a lot and have come across some bad parks that were rated good on this site and it makes me wonder ?


It is very rare for a review not to be published without the reviewer being given a chance to revise it. Possibly you have overlooked emails from this website asking you to revise some of your reviews. If a writer is asked to revise a review and doesn't respond, that review will never be published.
dgjg
QUOTE(docj @ Jul 8 2013, 11:42 PM) *

It is very rare for a review not to be published without the reviewer being given a chance to revise it. Possibly you have overlooked emails from this website asking you to revise some of your reviews. If a writer is asked to revise a review and doesn't respond, that review will never be published.

No, did not receive any emails asking me to revise.
dgjg
QUOTE(dgjg @ Jul 11 2013, 06:52 PM) *

No, did not receive any emails asking me to revise.

I am so sorry ! I take it back I did receive an email, I checked the wrong email the first time. I apologize for the first response and have resubmitted my reviews. Thank you for the opportunity to fix my review.
Puppie96
This is somewhat frustrating. I'm a newbie both to RV-ing and to this forum. I finally became a member and really struggled this morning to post my first 2 park reviews using my iPad (also a newbie to that) while using my husband's phone as a modem. We have a long trip in front of us. My first try fell into the abyss when we stopped at a point of interest in mid-review. I tried to continue but it didn't work so I had to do it all over. I will have to find time to post another because I do think I had some useful input about both parks.

I'm definitely not a park owner.

Oh, well.
Texasrvers
I'm sorry you are having trouble getting your reviews posted. I do not use an iPad to post reviews so I cannot offer any suggestions, but maybe one of our other members can help you.
RLM
Miniturized technology is a wonderful thing - most of the time. Mice sized QWERTY keyboards, the extra steps it takes to get proper punctuation and capitalization, and using fat fingers to hit small radio buttons is more trouble than it's worth. I prefer to do a review using my laptop in a word doc then save it and submit later using copy and paste when I am not occupied with something else. That also provides the luxury of spell check. I would rather take the time to get capitalization, punctuation, and spelling right than to have it returned for corrections.

Occasionally, I will just make notes on a piece of paper and then do the review later. I've done enough to remember what normally goes into one. But then there is the 18th century version of your review electronically "falling into abysses." That's when I can't find the piece of paper that I wrote the review on. smile.gif

Welcome to the forum.
Puppie96
QUOTE(RLM @ Aug 2 2013, 07:24 AM) *

Miniturized technology is a wonderful thing - most of the time. Mice sized QWERTY keyboards, the extra steps it takes to get proper punctuation and capitalization, and using fat fingers to hit small radio buttons is more trouble than it's worth. I prefer to do a review using my laptop in a word doc then save it and submit later using copy and paste when I am not occupied with something else. That also provides the luxury of spell check. I would rather take the time to get capitalization, punctuation, and spelling right than to have it returned for corrections.

Occasionally, I will just make notes on a piece of paper and then do the review later. I've done enough to remember what normally goes into one. But then there is the 18th century version of your review electronically "falling into abysses." That's when I can't find the piece of paper that I wrote the review on. smile.gif

Welcome to the forum.


Doing much better today. My first 2 reviews were up there even though I only had 2. I've done a couple more today. Something to do while riding across the desert.

Beautiful day today though. In the shade the temp's about perfect.

Thanks for the welcome.
David & Carol
I joined RV Park Review last Sunday. I have been using this site to find Parks to stay at for over one year, and it is very helpful. I posted my first review on Monday, and it has not been posted on the site. My account does not show any reviews, so when I went to repost the review, it said I had already reviewed this park.

What happened, I want to help people too?
dalsgal
David & Carol....welcome to the forum. According to the rules of this site you must post 3 reviews before you get posted. Post a couple more and I'm sure you will see yours. Also, the admins have to check each review that is written before it is posted and this is definitely the super busy time of their year.
David & Carol
QUOTE(dalsgal @ Aug 25 2013, 09:30 AM) *

David & Carol....welcome to the forum. According to the rules of this site you must post 3 reviews before you get posted. Post a couple more and I'm sure you will see yours. Also, the admins have to check each review that is written before it is posted and this is definitely the super busy time of their year.

Thank You, I just submitted two others.
Walt and Connie
This is a joke. Just looking for the place to delete you. Trying to sell a program for grammar correction then an insulting letter from a moron. Please save me the search and remove us now.
Texasrvers
QUOTE(Walt and Connie @ Aug 31 2013, 07:50 PM) *

Trying to sell a program for grammar correction then an insulting letter from a moron.


What are you referring to? What grammar program and what letter?
drw-cpa
For some reviews of campgrounds a picture tells a 1,000 words. When might we be able to post a pic as well as text about a campground?
HappiestCamper
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Aug 31 2013, 09:09 PM) *

What are you referring to? What grammar program and what letter?


The first sentence in their post says "This is a joke." Maybe they were referring to everything they wrote after that.
Texasrvers
QUOTE(HappiestCamper @ Sep 4 2013, 11:01 AM) *

The first sentence in their post says "This is a joke." Maybe they were referring to everything they wrote after that.



Maybe.
Fitzjohnfan
QUOTE(drw-cpa @ Sep 4 2013, 08:41 AM) *

For some reviews of campgrounds a picture tells a 1,000 words. When might we be able to post a pic as well as text about a campground?


I hope the admin's don't mind me speaking for them here, but it's hard enough to verify the validity and truthfulness of the written words posted here as reviews. If we were to add photos, that would add another piece of information that could be used incorrectly. Suppose someone took a photo of another campground and posted it as belonging to another campground. What if they took a movie still from "Deliverance" and said "this campground looked just llike this!" How can the admins verify that to be accurate?

Also, how long would you retain the photos? Campgrounds can change drastically in less than a year if you stop watering/mowing the grass, stop routine maintenance, and let things go to heck.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.