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
Webmaster
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.
campinggirl1964
It's too bad you have to do this to control who posts. However, I'd like to thank you for taking the extra time to ensure the reviews are legitimate before they get posted. It's too bad we (the people who read the reviews) didn't know which owners are trying to post their own reviews because they would be the kind of owner whose park I wouldn't want to stay at.

Keep up the great work - this is a great rving resource.
BBear
That is a shame because it's always the innocent who are hurt in the end.

I love this site, but I'm what you call a repeat campground attendee....I latch on to a campground and usually stay there numerous times during the summer, but don't feel the need to post the same review for the same campground over and over. When I do go to another campground, I have posted the review here....the lastest one being this morning, but I guess nobody is going to see it, because I don't think in total I have posted over 5 reviews.

I don't think a person should be penalized because of how few reviews they post...I don't know...just doesn't make sense to me....I'd be more inclined to think a person who posts a lot of reviews would be the one who possibly may be "inflating" for campgrounds, but that's just my opinion.
gonefishin
QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 4 2006, 07:18 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.



This is a shame. I submitted my first ever review today because I am just getting into camping and felt compelled to warn my fellow campers of a really bad site in New Jersey. It is a shame that noone will get to see this review until I've gone to 4 more sites and reviewed them.

If anyone is interested, I posted the main part of my review in the discussion area. Look for the green emoticon.

Thanks and keep up the great work. This website is a tremendous service to people like me who are just getting started.
pjtjmn
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?
BBear
QUOTE(pjtjmn @ Jul 17 2006, 05:39 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?


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.
dgc_61
QUOTE(BBear @ Jul 17 2006, 07:21 PM) *

QUOTE(pjtjmn @ Jul 17 2006, 05:39 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?


Great thoughts!

I've been on this forum for a long time and I just feel totally offended by this new rule...I think it's totally inappropriate and serves no real purpose.


I am another vote for there otta be a better way. I reviewed at least one other park that got listed right away. Now my latest review is held up pending who knows how long. I even sent in a correction to another park listed in error but I suppose that can't be released either. Why don't you ask for references from new people before you allow them to review? Rv.Net or Escapees would be good sources.
Zig
I think we should be able to rate the reviewers. "Was this rating Helpfully?" I have seen this on other opinion sights. If it is just one or two reviews that are out of line, people will know to disregard those as somebody with a ax to grind, or somebody affiliated with the campground.
I am not going to fill out 5 reviews, due to the fact that we don't go to that many in one year. We do stay at one park for a week at a time, but, just do not go to that many campgrounds. This is a bad policy. blink.gif
boater
We are new campers -one year, and have visited several campgrounds, maybe7 or 8. most came recomended from reviews on this site. it would seem to me that it would be very fair to ask for a little resume when one joins the site that has a history for the person. from this it woud be easy to tell who was posting for themselves.
As the policy stands now we would not be able to post for campgrounds because like most everyone else now we are staying longer at fewer campgrounds and chosing the ones we stay at very carefully from the existing reviews.
stonybirch
sad.gif I too think the new policy is a bad idea. I don't always post if I concur with a campground that has several reviews. I have referred numerous RVers and campers to site and they have told me how much it has helped them. Several have left posts, using pretty much the idea as I do. I really don't think the policy will prevent 'owners' from 'loading the reviews'--they'll just have more time on their hands with less business!!!! Let's all do some thinking about how the problem can be 'fixed. One major problem--there will always be dishonest people doing very ugly things!
Every trip we take--long or short-I use this site as much as possible! Love the forums, too. Have gotten some great ideas along the way!!!
Webmaster
QUOTE(boater @ Jul 24 2006, 09:05 PM) *

We are new campers -one year, and have visited several campgrounds, maybe7 or 8. most came recomended from reviews on this site. it would seem to me that it would be very fair to ask for a little resume when one joins the site that has a history for the person. from this it woud be easy to tell who was posting for themselves.
As the policy stands now we would not be able to post for campgrounds because like most everyone else now we are staying longer at fewer campgrounds and chosing the ones we stay at very carefully from the existing reviews.


We have lowered the quota for new reviewers to 3 different campgrounds. This is a temporary solution to this problem and we will have a better solution soon.
johnwadams
I moderate and approve new members to an outdoor forum. I will not approve anyone who fails to answer each of 3 questions when they register and they must have a verifiable (normally USA) e-mail address. I found that I had about 2 people with Russian e-mail addresses try to join each week. All they probably wanted was access to the members e-mail address. I have followed this forum for years and made numerous posts to it. I would hate to stay at a campground that got a terrible review but I was not allowed to see it, just because the reviewer wasn't "approved yet". There has to be a better way to verify that the person posting does not represent a campground.
John Adams
Memphis, TN
pjtjmn
QUOTE(Webmaster @ Jul 25 2006, 04:31 PM) *


We have lowered the quota for new reviewers to 3 different campgrounds. This is a temporary solution to this problem and we will have a better solution soon.



smile.gif Thanks for listening to our concerns!

Like I mentioned in an earlier post, I understand WHY you want to enforce a new policy, but 5 did seem excessive....

This site has been valuable for me, (I'm new to camping), and I wanted to be able to give back by posting my reviews...

(And now I'll complete my third.. I wasn't going to bother until I read your new guidelines.)


Now that I've got your attention... I do have one more suggestion: biggrin.gif

If only we could have an OPTION to switch back to the old format where you could see ALL of the reviews for an entire state listed one directly under the other.. It was more conveint for me to check out the whole state "at a glance". I know that others enjoy the new format due to slow computer speeds, but again, the OPTION to switch to "all at once" would be greatly appreciated!!



Thanks again....
Johna Kaye Lane
I think that I may have made the same review of the same campground, When I get to my 5 reviews will it post the same one twice ohmy.gif
blomquir
I'm with them. Even at 3 reviews it's a bad deal for the users.

Our family only stays at a formal "campground" once or twice a year....the rest of the 10 trips a year we make is dry-camping out in the boonies. Basically, we hate campground camping but when we choose to camp in a campground it's critical to see reports from folks in order to make our stay as less-irritating as possible......and the more folks and the more reports the better. This new policy stiffles that. It also puts a clamp on us being able to submit reports for a couple of years (until we meet the new threshold for reporting)

There's got to be a better way, especially for those of us that have already been published 1 or more times on the site.
Cheryl Fuller
QUOTE(blomquir @ Jul 27 2006, 09:39 PM) *
I'm with them. Even at 3 reviews it's a bad deal for the users.

Our family only stays at a formal "campground" once or twice a year....the rest of the 10 trips a year we make is dry-camping out in the boonies. Basically, we hate campground camping but when we choose to camp in a campground it's critical to see reports from folks in order to make our stay as less-irritating as possible......and the more folks and the more reports the better. This new policy stiffles that. It also puts a clamp on us being able to submit reports for a couple of years (until we meet the new threshold for reporting)

There's got to be a better way, especially for those of us that have already been published 1 or more times on the site.








I think it is a necessary step to insure that campground owners do not come here and try to stack the deck in their favor. Maybe you should post reviews for the past campgrounds you have stayed at. You said you have submitted 1 but I would assume you have stayed at more than 1 campground. I support the webmaster in his efforts to keep the forum a true review by campers and not owners. I am sorry that you feel you are being left out but I really don't see any other way that wold not involve greater time and expense.
blomquir
I submitted 1 in 2004 which is still out and can be read. I also submitted one a week or 2 ago from a trip we made last year (never posted on the site but now I know why).

Fast forward to tonight. I just reviewed another CG we stayed at in June. When I finished that I saw a notice on the top of the page that said something to the effect of "thanks for submitting a review, we're holding it until you reach 3 reviews of different campgrounds, you have 1 of the 3 required on hold".

So the system is not counting the one I have published from 2004, nor it is recognizing the one I reported on a couple of weeks ago (from a trip last summer). Frustrating................

p.s. I think those folks that are submitting bogus reports to bolster campgrounds should be identified on the page.
Texasrvers
I am still fairly new to this site, and I donít want to anger all the good RVerís who write honest reviews or the wonderful folks who do such a good job maintaining this site. What a job it must be to screen all those reviews! But here are my thoughts.

If campground owners really want to be dishonest and post a review for their own campground, they will find a way to do it regardless of the restrictions that are placed on this site to try to keep them from doing just that. So then it is really the honest reviewers who are being hurt by the restrictions, not the campground owners. You have indicated that you have ways of determining if the review is from a campground owner, but I would bet that for every way you have, a dishonest person can figure out many ways around it. The only thing that keeps anyone (RVer or owner) from writing a dishonest review is his/her own honesty and integrity.

Also, if some people write only one review a year it could be three years before their first review is posted. Campgrounds can change a lot in that time, and I think most people who use this site would prefer a much more recent review of a campground before choosing it.

I just wanted to voice my opinion, but let me end on a good note. This is still a fantastic site. I always rely on it to plan our trips, and it has been a great help.
Syl
Is there a link to click on to find out what campgrounds I've posted about? I'm new here and maybe it's staring me in the face but I don't see it. We took a lengthy trip recently and I'm not sure which reviews I've left that are in the 'hold' area waiting to be approved. I know ... it's not very smart of me, but I thought the posts would pop up quickly so I did not write them down. Now I am reluctant to add more in case I've already done so. Help. sad.gif

Sylvia
Lucky Card Campers
On Monday (2 days ago) I posted a review to the site and it hasn't shown yet. I have other reviews on the site so obviously I have met the 3 visit quota- what can be wrong?
Cheryl
The webmasters are probably busy, jobs, everyday life, etc. They do not get paid to run this site, they do it out of goodwill and the love of camping. As long as your reviews meet the guidelines, they will post it when they have time. It sometimes takes a few days. If you don't see it after a week or so, resubmit using these guidelines (found on the review notice page)
  • Due to the volume of reviews that we receive, we need your help! Please punctuate your reviews correctly, and use mixed case. Include 2 spaces after punctuation at the end of sentences and 1 space after commas, and use Proper Case! DO NOT USE ALL CAPITALS! or all lower case, PLEASE!
  • Spelling "my best camp" or "my town" without the first letter being a capital letter or "WISCONSIN" in all capitals is not correct punctuation. "My Best Camp" and "My Town" and "Wisconsin" is correct!
  • Everything that you enter wrong (including partial names of campgrounds) has to be re-entered by hand. So if you entered "My Best" and it should read "My Best Campground" you will know why your review was not posted!
  • You must enter the exact state and city that the campground is in or the review will not be posted.
  • Do not add extra "notes" with the city such as "near Chicago" as this just has to be removed. Enter just the city where the campground is actually located--nothing more!
  • You must provide an accurate complete name of the campground you are giving the review on. Entering just "KOA" is not good enough, as there could be more than one KOA in the area. If we can not verify that the review matches the city and campground, then we will not post the review.
  • Take the time to find and enter the campgrounds website, but get it correct please. Entering a website such as http://www.koa.com is not correct, as that is the main website for KOA and not the campground you are giving the review on.
Don't get discouraged, the more reviews on here the better!
blomquir
QUOTE(Cheryl @ Aug 9 2006, 05:24 PM) *

[*]Spelling "my best camp" or "my town" without the first letter being a capital letter or "WISCONSIN" in all capitals is not correct punctuation. "My Best Camp" and "My Town" and "Wisconsin" is correct!


I guess I don't understand your quote and instruction about capitalization.

If I'm writing at sentence such as:

"My best camp........" why would I capitalize the "b" in best and the "c" in camp?

or

"My town is very much like........" why would I capitalize the "t" in town?

Not trying to pick a fight but I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

V/R

Rich
johnwadams
Why not:
1. If someone posts a review for a CG that has already had reviews posted for it and their review is in line with the others, let it post, regardless of it being someones first post.
2. Since the worry is that CG owners will overate their campground, allow all average or below average reviews post at once.
3. Let the readers use some common sense. I don't see the percieved problem unless an owner posts a 5 star review for his campground and no one else has ever posted anything about the CG, either positive or negative. Most readers have access to the Trailer Life Directory or Woddalls and will try to do additional checking on a CG with only one review.

Last:
How many campground owners have actually been caught posting overrated reviews for their campgrounds???
John of Memphis
Cheryl
QUOTE
I guess I don't understand your quote and instruction about capitalization.

If I'm writing at sentence such as:

"My best camp........" why would I capitalize the "b" in best and the "c" in camp?

or

"My town is very much like........" why would I capitalize the "t" in town?

Not trying to pick a fight but I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

V/R

Rich


First off, these are not my instructions. I copied and pasted them from this site's submit a review notice page. My interpretation is that they are using My Best Camp as an example name of a campground and My Town as an example of the town the campground is in.
genestoy
Hi,

The "My Best Camp" refers to the actual name of the campground not the comments section in other words you would enter New York KOA, not New york koa or new york koa. and the "My Town" refers to entering New York, not New york or new york. Of course these would only matter if the campground had never been reviewed before as the correct names and punctuation should already be there in the list. smile.gif
mpj
sad.gif Bad Idea. I understand WHY it is necessary, but isn't there a better way? Some people only camp once or twice a year and need a good reccommendation or a warning "not to go there". Some people only post once or twice a year. Try to come up with a BETTER solution - otherwise, Why have the reviews in the first place?
rodman
Thats to bad. I gave my first review for a park I really loved and it's a shame people won't hear about it. I use this site quite often, my wife and I try and get away once a month or so. I would like to be able to check for recent reviews instead of going somewhere and finding out the place was a dump and the review was being held. I sure hate to waste a weekend because a few moron's ruin it for the majority of honest people that really enjoy this site and benefit from it. Oh well, only takes a few.
rodman
QUOTE(Cheryl @ Aug 9 2006, 05:24 PM) *

The webmasters are probably busy, jobs, everyday life, etc. They do not get paid to run this site, they do it out of goodwill and the love of camping. As long as your reviews meet the guidelines, they will post it when they have time. It sometimes takes a few days. If you don't see it after a week or so, resubmit using these guidelines (found on the review notice page)
  • Due to the volume of reviews that we receive, we need your help! Please punctuate your reviews correctly, and use mixed case. Include 2 spaces after punctuation at the end of sentences and 1 space after commas, and use Proper Case! DO NOT USE ALL CAPITALS! or all lower case, PLEASE!
  • Spelling "my best camp" or "my town" without the first letter being a capital letter or "WISCONSIN" in all capitals is not correct punctuation. "My Best Camp" and "My Town" and "Wisconsin" is correct!
  • Everything that you enter wrong (including partial names of campgrounds) has to be re-entered by hand. So if you entered "My Best" and it should read "My Best Campground" you will know why your review was not posted!
  • You must enter the exact state and city that the campground is in or the review will not be posted.
  • Do not add extra "notes" with the city such as "near Chicago" as this just has to be removed. Enter just the city where the campground is actually located--nothing more!
  • You must provide an accurate complete name of the campground you are giving the review on. Entering just "KOA" is not good enough, as there could be more than one KOA in the area. If we can not verify that the review matches the city and campground, then we will not post the review.
  • Take the time to find and enter the campgrounds website, but get it correct please. Entering a website such as <a href="http://www.koa.com" target="_blank">http://www.koa.com</a> is not correct, as that is the main website for KOA and not the campground you are giving the review on.
Don't get discouraged, the more reviews on here the better!

You can't resubmit, it says you have already submitted a review of this site and have to wait 90 days before submitting another one. Did I miss something. I love this site and would like to submit more as my wife and travel almost once a month to a place somewhere we have seen on this site.
rodman
QUOTE(blomquir @ Jul 27 2006, 10:06 PM) *

I submitted 1 in 2004 which is still out and can be read. I also submitted one a week or 2 ago from a trip we made last year (never posted on the site but now I know why).

Fast forward to tonight. I just reviewed another CG we stayed at in June. When I finished that I saw a notice on the top of the page that said something to the effect of "thanks for submitting a review, we're holding it until you reach 3 reviews of different campgrounds, you have 1 of the 3 required on hold".

So the system is not counting the one I have published from 2004, nor it is recognizing the one I reported on a couple of weeks ago (from a trip last summer). Frustrating................

p.s. I think those folks that are submitting bogus reports to bolster campgrounds should be identified on the page.

Now thats a great idea!!!!!!!!!!
Cheryl
QUOTE
You can't resubmit, it says you have already submitted a review of this site and have to wait 90 days before submitting another one. Did I miss something. I love this site and would like to submit more as my wife and travel almost once a month to a place somewhere we have seen on this site.

Since I can't see your review, I can't tell you why they didn't post it. Your best bet would be to PM the webmaster and ask what went wrong. I would guess that the 90 day wait is so that one person can't flood the site with reviews about one campground. Just another way they are trying to keep the site "legit".
lagerdaddy
It would not suprise me at all if many of the reviews I have read here are phonies. That's what the world has come to. But as one person said here in so many words, rules are for honest people. There is no sure way to prevent the dishonest from promoting themselves and discrediting others in this manner, it's just not that hard to do. What I suggest is this:

Give the readers a little credit, most of us are smart enough to do the math. Ten great reviews (9-10), five good (7-8), two awful reviews 1-2, that's just as easy to figure out as the CG three miles away with the reverse ratings!

Make it mandatory for users to give their full information, name address and phone number. This won't prevent fraud, but will discourage it, especially if the info is verified from time to time. And make the users accept a USER AGREEMENT, in which they electronically "sign" and accept the terms.

If any user provides false, misleading, or otherwise dishonest information, can em! If they are found to be CG owners, report them on the reviews.


Otherwise, you have created an atmosphere in which honest people are forced to prove their credibility, which I personally think is offensive. I stayed at a great CG last week that got good reviews on this site. Let me tell everyone about it! NOW! blink.gif
lagerdaddy
I failed to make one further suggestion. Delete reviews over two years old, this will help people to be more objective also.
Cheryl Fuller
I would have no problem with giving my full name, in fact it is my user name, so no big secret there. But as someone who has been the victim of identity theft - posting your address and phone number is asking for trouble. Another consideration is that we all talk about our upcoming trips - would you want your address posted in the same forum where you have announced you will be away from your home? I certainly would not....
Cheryl Fuller
QUOTE(rodman @ Aug 18 2006, 03:10 PM) *
Thats to bad. I gave my first review for a park I really loved and it's a shame people won't hear about it. I use this site quite often, my wife and I try and get away once a month or so. I would like to be able to check for recent reviews instead of going somewhere and finding out the place was a dump and the review was being held. I sure hate to waste a weekend because a few moron's ruin it for the majority of honest people that really enjoy this site and benefit from it. Oh well, only takes a few.




Since you camp once a month, it will be no time before you have the 3 that are neccessary. Why not post on some of the parks or campgrounds you have been to in the past few months?
Cheryl Fuller
Okay guys, it may be my "over 40 brain" being in meltdown, but I really don't understand all the hoopla concerning the rules. Life has rules - that's just the way it is. Our wonderful webmaster has gone to the trouble and time to try and set some boundaries in place, which are mainly to protect the integrity of the forum and reviews, and I don't think that 3 reviews are too much for him to ask of us. Surely most campers have been to at least 3 campgrounds or parks. When I worked, I didn't care for most of my boss'es rules either, but I never asked her to change them to suit me, I just did what I had to do to abide by the boundaries. I know this may anger some of you but as I said, it is only 3 reviews, not 30. Surely, most of you see that he cannot just allow reviews to be posted helter skelter. He is doing what he can to insure the honesty of the information being submitted and I commend and thank him for it....
genestoy
I second Cheryl's reply 100%. Life has rules, heck I can do 3 reviews in 3 days travelling. You can't tell me that nearly everybody who has an rv has not or will not stay at three different campgrounds at some point? Very few people will only go to just one campground, and think about that, if they do only go to one campground do you honestly think that they would give that campground a poor review? I think not, as they would not keep going back to just that one campground if it was poor, so what value would that review have? sad.gif I think the webmaster has implemented some good things to help keep the reviews as honest as they can be. You can't please everybody 100% of the time, it is their website and they will do what they wish and we will have to live by it or leave it, it is that simple!
rodman
QUOTE(Cheryl @ Aug 18 2006, 04:00 PM) *

QUOTE
You can't resubmit, it says you have already submitted a review of this site and have to wait 90 days before submitting another one. Did I miss something. I love this site and would like to submit more as my wife and travel almost once a month to a place somewhere we have seen on this site.

Since I can't see your review, I can't tell you why they didn't post it. Your best bet would be to PM the webmaster and ask what went wrong. I would guess that the 90 day wait is so that one person can't flood the site with reviews about one campground. Just another way they are trying to keep the site "legit".

Thanks for your reply, PM? I did e-mail them asking that very question in case I did do something wrong so it wouldn't happen again and also have not received a reply. I'll have to just continue reading other peoples reviews. Like I posted we do travel a bit.
rodman
QUOTE(Cheryl Fuller @ Aug 20 2006, 09:00 PM) *

QUOTE(rodman @ Aug 18 2006, 03:10 PM) *
Thats to bad. I gave my first review for a park I really loved and it's a shame people won't hear about it. I use this site quite often, my wife and I try and get away once a month or so. I would like to be able to check for recent reviews instead of going somewhere and finding out the place was a dump and the review was being held. I sure hate to waste a weekend because a few moron's ruin it for the majority of honest people that really enjoy this site and benefit from it. Oh well, only takes a few.




Since you camp once a month, it will be no time before you have the 3 that are neccessary. Why not post on some of the parks or campgrounds you have been to in the past few months?

Thank you, I will. I have no complaint about what they are doing, after all I'm not the one having to try and run this site. I believe all they do is a great benifit to all of us.
Cheryl
QUOTE
Thanks for your reply, PM? I did e-mail them asking that very question in case I did do something wrong so it wouldn't happen again and also have not received a reply. I'll have to just continue reading other peoples reviews. Like I posted we do travel a bit.

PM stands for personal message - same as an email only it goes through this site instead of having to use an email address. The recipient will receive notification when they log on here. Less chance of having your message blocked by email filters.
Also, I noticed there are a lot of new reviews posted today. Maybe yours is included.
lagerdaddy
QUOTE(Cheryl Fuller @ Aug 20 2006, 11:57 PM) *

I would have no problem with giving my full name, in fact it is my user name, so no big secret there. But as someone who has been the victim of identity theft - posting your address and phone number is asking for trouble. Another consideration is that we all talk about our upcoming trips - would you want your address posted in the same forum where you have announced you will be away from your home? I certainly would not....


Misunderstood...........the story of my life. Address and phone number to REGISTER, not posted. tongue.gif
rodman
QUOTE(Cheryl @ Aug 21 2006, 10:05 AM) *

QUOTE
Thanks for your reply, PM? I did e-mail them asking that very question in case I did do something wrong so it wouldn't happen again and also have not received a reply. I'll have to just continue reading other peoples reviews. Like I posted we do travel a bit.

PM stands for personal message - same as an email only it goes through this site instead of having to use an email address. The recipient will receive notification when they log on here. Less chance of having your message blocked by email filters.
Also, I noticed there are a lot of new reviews posted today. Maybe yours is included.

Thank you for addressing my post's. I believe the people who maitain this site as well as the people who seem to help the newbie's, such as yourself will make RV'ing a whole lot nicer for everyone. Just goes to show you, RV people are the best.
Cheryl
You're welcome. We were all "newbies" at one time. If you stick around this site, you will find a lot of very friendly helpful people.

QUOTE
Just goes to show you, RV people are the best.

Absolutely! biggrin.gif
donner
So what is the deal? I have entered my five reviews; Texas state parks in Smithville and Kerrville (that's two), Roam and Roost in Crossville, TN, (that's three), Sudemeir's in St. Charles, Mo. (that's four) and one outside of Hattiesburg, MS. (that's five) and yet, my reviews are not appearing. So if there is a waiting period after someone enters the reviews the site manager needs to let us know.
Giving five reviews that are current can be a bit difficult if you have a RV park that you are preferencial toward and stay there a lot.
So now what?
Cheryl Fuller
Donner, as the reviews are manually entered by the administrator, it may just be taking a little time. How long has it been since you entered them? He may be away or loaded down with work, so as long as they met the guidelines, I am sure they will appear as soon as he can get to them. In the meantime, keep posting and reviewing....
Big Ben
I have post 2 reviews in a row and both were excepted. As far as some one not believing the reviews, I guess thats your choice. They are posted here in good faith, for the most part.
Sure there is a different in how people review. We look for different things and rate them accordingly. You job is to sort through them and try to find what you are looking for. This site has help a lot of people, me for one.
I suppose next you would want a notarized statement.
COWolfPack
I just registered and and I can see where the webmaster is coming from. Unfortunately no matter what method that you can come up with to try and weed out the dishonest someone will find a way around it. As a temporary solution 3 reviews is not all that bad. I have already submitted 2, 1 from a trip in August and 1 from a trip back in 2004. I will have my third review after a trip next week. I guess we will just have to work with it now until something better comes around.

As for trusting the reviews you really have to look at them as a whole. When a campsite has one or two reviews, good or bad, you have to take it with a grain of salt and still probably could give the campsite a chance. When a campsite has several reviews then you will be able to see an overall picture of what the site is like and be able to make a more informed decision leaving less to chance. smile.gif
M and F
After an 8 week trip, I am in the process of submittng reviews of the parks were visited. But a problem has arisen. Two park reviews were rejected ". . . 90 day wait. . ." I have not reviewed these parks. Why is my review rejected?
Cheryl
I think the 90 day wait is if you want to submit another review for a park you have already submitted one for. In other words, you can only submit one review for "Joe's Campground, Anytown, USA" every 90 days.
M and F
I'm sorry that I didn't make myself plain. I tried to review a park in Kelso, WA. It came back that I had reviewed this park, but I haven't. Strange, isn't it?
Cheryl
Did you accidently double click the submit button? That could have caused the message you got.
Other than that, I guess you'll have to wait until you meet the 3 minimum reviews and then see if you review on the Kelso, WA park posts. If it doesn't, wait 90 days and resubmit. This website is great, but remember, nothing is perfect, you'll get the occasional glitch.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.