Suggestions for Making RV Park Reviews Even More Useful

Discussion in 'Trip Planning and Travel Concerns' started by Camera Buff, Jan 5, 2017.

  1. Camera Buff

    Camera Buff
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1
    I love RV Park Reviews and only stay in parks that I've reviewed using this site--mainly because of our rig size. I don't know how difficult it would be to do what I'm going to suggest, but being able to filter parks based on specific criteria would really make trip planning much easier for folks who do lots of RVing--like we do.

    Ideally, I'd like to be able to filter RV parks based on at least the following criteria (in priority order, most important first):
    1. Big rig friendly? Suggested possible choices: (a) there is plenty of room to maneuver big rigs to and within at least some loops of the park or (b) not big rig friendly. Users could call the park to ensure they have sites long enough to accommodate their particular RV. But if the trees haven't been trimmed or the roads are too narrow, we need to know.
    2. Electricity: e.g., Park has at least some (a) 50A sites, (b) some 30A sites, (c) some sites with <30A, or (d) no electricity
    3. Water: e.g., (a) at all/most RV sites, (b) available but not at RV sites, & (c) not available
    4. Sewer: e.g., (a) available at some/all RV sites, (b) not available at RV sites but dump station available, or (c) no sewer/dump station available.
    5. Cell Phone Reception (needed at least for emergencies): e.g., (a) AT&T usable at least somewhere within park; (b) No AT&T, (c) Version usable at least somewhere within park: and (d) no Version, . . .

    For example, we pull a 36' 5th wheel behind a full-size (crew cab, 8' bed) pickup for several months each year. Consequently, we're staying at many RV parks each year, which makes trip planning time consuming. If a park isn't big rig friendly, with at least 30A power and water (somewhere on site), I'd rather not waste time reading its review. Many/most of us can either get by without sewer (because of ample holding tanks or short stays) for a few days or have a tote to use at a dump station. I can do without cell phone service, but my wife can't.

    It would be nice to have the following additional filtering criteria, but I could live without these if more reviewers would add this information in their reviews:
    1. Distance from a particular destination -- e.g., within (a) 10 miles, (b) <25 miles or (c) > 25 miles of listed destination). Destination could be a town or major attractions (e.g., Disneyland, National Parks). If our desired location didn't have an acceptable park, this filtering criteria would make it easier to find a suitable park close by.
    2. WIFI: e.g., (a) available throughout park, (b) available only near office or some park building, or (c) unavailable.
    3. When Open?: e.g., (a) yearlong or (b) seasonal
    4. Reviewer rating (e.g., Excellent, Good, Average, Poor, Unrated - - like currently provided
    5. Reservations Accepted: (a) Yes or (b) No
    I suspect other forum users will have additional suggestions.

    The other information that is currently available (plumbed toilets, showers, pool, shade, lake access, river access, pet friendly, etc.) should continue to be shown. I encourage all who use RV Park Reviews to make an effort to add these sorts of information to all the reviews you submit. If we all do this, perhaps we can achieve what I'm suggesting someday.
     
    garybnkr likes this.
  2. docj

    docj
    Expand Collapse
    RVing Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    526
    As a full-timer with 6 years and 55,000 miles of experience, I offer some comments on your suggestions:

    Our experience has been that this is a very subjective attribute, depending on the skills of the driver. Some people have trouble getting their <30' rig into a park into which I've taken our 40' MH. Similarly, some people get upset about any trees or other foliage contacting the sides of their RV as they drive through a park. Some of us think of this as "Texas pinstriping". Personally, the data for this attribute is so inconsistent that I sometimes think it would be better not to have it.

    All of this data is in the park listings. Making it searchable is possible but would require a massive manual effort. Maybe someday.......

    This data is now being collected but the number of parks with data is small compared to the total. Furthermore, many users have minimal technical sophistication and their ratings are very subjective and dependent on phone type rather than being objectively measured.

    All parks are listed with regard to their distance from the center of the city in which they are located. Trying to include other destinations within an area is, IMO, an unreasonable request to make of this website. This is what Google Maps is for.

    I agree that it would be nice to be able to search for most of these, but, as mentioned earlier, it would necessitate a huge manual effort to add this to the >15,000 park listings in the RVPR database. I suspect that someday this will be possible, but not for a while.
     
    John E. Baker III likes this.
  3. Camera Buff

    Camera Buff
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joel: You make some excellent points, which I fully understand and mostly agree. Some of the newer reviews are already providing very useful information (site number, amount of privacy between sites, length of pad, nearby attractions, etc.) below their reviews. If nothing else, lets expand on this and encourage reviewers to provide this information. If we don't begin to do this now, we'll never be able to make the sorts of improvements I suggested. With enough reviews, surely some consensus should be achievable even with subjective criteria like "big rig friendly." Thank you for your useful comments and all you do for RVPR.
     
  4. docj

    docj
    Expand Collapse
    RVing Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    526
    We always encourage reviewers to provide as much detail as possible about a park but different people have different perspectives about what constitutes an acceptable review. This is true regardless of whether you are discussing reviews on this website or product reviews on Amazon. There is no way to force people to include information that you might think is important if they don't think it is relevant to themselves. Quite honestly, as someone who doesn't have a dog, I don't bother to include information on dog runs in my reviews. The same thing is true of people who don't travel with children--I doubt many of them bother to note the presence of playgrounds, sandboxes, etc. There's simply nothing you can do to change that behavior.
     
    garybnkr likes this.
  5. Camera Buff

    Camera Buff
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1
    You're correct; some folks aren't going out of their way to do anything to help others. However, if the review sheet form contained fields for important attributes (e.g., site number, pad length, etc.), many folks would provide this information. We travel with a dog, but I don't think any of my reviews have ever addressed whether a park was dog friendly--simply because the review sheet didn't jog my memory to do so.
     
  6. Jack B

    Jack B
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2014
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    33
    I think you are being a little hard on the folks who take the time to write a review at all. I believe that all the reviewers I've encountered here would be glad to help me. One of the most important motivating factors in writing a review is that we enjoy doing it. I would not like checking off a,b,c choices on a digital questionnaire. I like writing open prose and trying to make it interesting.
    I enjoy others' reviews as well and often read them if they cover a park where we have stayed.
    If "BounderPounder" will excuse me,
    "No shade, as the nearest tree is several miles away". A great line in the review for a Kansas park.
    I get the info that there is not a lot of shade, and I get a bonus laugh as well.
    Ever since I retired someone has been handing me a questionnaire on a clip board. I come to RVPR for its free and open style. I enjoy the reviews and the camaraderie of the Forum.
    RV'ing can at times be chore, this website should not be.
     
  7. docj

    docj
    Expand Collapse
    RVing Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    526
    I don't disagree, but we are now getting many of our reviews from phones and tablets on which writing open prose is more difficult to create. Providing boxes to check makes it easier for mobile users to submit meaningful reviews.
     
    garybnkr likes this.
  8. docj

    docj
    Expand Collapse
    RVing Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    526
    I'm not sure what you're looking at but our current review input form does contain a box for entry of site number and a drop-down which allows the reviewer to note if his site was "longer than his tow vehicle and RV", "about the same length as......" or, "shorter than .......". We decided making site length a specific length would result in fewer people providing an input.
     
  9. Sharon and Gary

    Sharon and Gary
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2017
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3
    I would like to see more photos of the actual campsites. I sometimes see photos of people's dogs, kids, flowers, etc., and that is not helpful. I want to see how much room there is for slides and awnings and how the hookups are situated. I want to see if there is a place to park my toad. I would also like to see more posts of which are the "preferred" campsites and why.
     
    Medic73 and garybnkr like this.
  10. Texasrvers

    Texasrvers
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    9,197
    Likes Received:
    737
    Thank you for mentioning this. The purpose of displaying photos submitted from members is to depict the property or relevant camping experience. Therefore, we prefer that photos are images of the campground, the sites, and the facilities as you have suggested. This is not intended to be a place where family vacation photos are posted, and therefore, we do not generally post photos that depict pets, flowers, kids, wildlife, etc. unless they happen to be in a photo that shows a useful view of the campground. For example, a photo of a pet standing in the RV door does not show users anything about the campground. However, a photo of the pet area with a pet standing in it would be acceptable if the intent of the image is to show the pet area and not just the pet.

    A full list of guidelines for submitting photos can be found at https://www.campgroundreviews.com/docs/guidelines.
     
    Sharon and Gary likes this.
  11. BankShot

    BankShot
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,672
    Likes Received:
    1,775
    We just returned from a trip to Arizona and experienced a park that we had made reservations at due to the reviews we read about it along with the pics we saw on the park's website. We ended up losing the first night's fees but did get a refund for the remaining nights. We took about 6 hours to drive to this park and when we got there we completely blown away by how different it was compared to what we had read and seen in the pictures. It appeared to be an "oasis" and turned out to be nothing more than a dirt road, dirt site campground with dust blowing everywhere from driving thru to find out site. The pull thru site we had reserved dropped off downhill in front to where in order to hook up our front end would have been slanting downhill making it basically impossible to get level. And to top it off, the sewer connection was UPHILL from the coach. We are still trying to figure out how water and sewage flows up hill........... :rolleyes:. The fresh water connections were hidden inside a half rotten wood box full of weeds, bugs, more dirt and even some capped off wiring. And what really pissed us off was that we had just finished washing the coach prior to leaving our last park and as we drove out of this one we left a dust rooster trail behind us. Our wheels and tires were also completed coated with that brownish red dirt and dust. I realize that there are going to be times when a park is not what it appears to be in pictures, etc. but this one really takes the cake when it comes to making you think you will be camping in "paradise" next to a pristine lake and tucked away cozily between some huge boulders and rocks, etc. What they don't tell you is that you need to deflate your tires down to around 10 lbs so you can maneuver thru the dirt and what I'm sure is pure unadulterated MUD when it rains. Very deceiving website and we were very disappointed as we left to find another park to stay in................. :( Sorry, didn't really mean to get so long winded here but I just had to get this "load of dirt" off my shoulders and used this thread to do so. My review of this park is forthcoming in the park reviews section of course............. :D

    Rant completed, BankShot..............(aka Terry)
     
  12. Monica998

    Monica998
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2018
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think there is a shortage of the platform that the RVers can share the RV Trip experience, including the routine, the parking, the nearby gas station, the Parks, the photos, the notice and the judgement etc... Now all the experience are dispersed, otherwise you searched them in the search engine.
     
  13. NYDutch

    NYDutch
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    725
    BankShot and Paythebill like this.
  14. BankShot

    BankShot
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,672
    Likes Received:
    1,775
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    It does seem to appear that Monica998 hasn't as yet taken a look at the "REVIEWS" part of this website and perhaps thinks our reviews should be posted on the forum side..............??? If you read what Dutch said above Monica998 you will find that everything you mentioned in your Post #12 above can be found there.........:D

    BankShot.............(aka Terry)
     
    Paythebill and NYDutch like this.

Share This Page