Question about which campgrounds are chosen as "Highly Rated" or "Popular"

Using the state of Oregon as an example, I'm curious how the site administrator chooses which campgrounds are chosen as "Highly Rated" or "Popular". All but one of the campgrounds currently listed as highly rated or popular are RV Parks. I'm a native (58 years) Oregonian with a lifetime of camping experiences. I can say without prejudice that most of our State Parks are much nicer than the RV Parks in the state, especially for privacy and recreational opportunities. Just curious. Thanks!

 

This is basically the same question I asked on 11/30/14 in the New Site Problems thread.

 

I'm probably the only person still waiting for an answer to the question asked by this OP of this thread..

 

The first thing that should be noted here is that both these lists are not fixed; they will change every time you click on a state. Try refreshing your browser screen, you will see that the listed parks change each time.

The popular CG's are clearly those with lots of reviews. I suspect that the system has been set to display a random list of 5 parks in the state that have in excess of a certain number of reviews (it looks as if the number is about 70).

The highly rated ones appear as if they are also being selected in a similar manner. Parks with ratings in excess of some threshold are being displayed in lists of 5. Contrary to what the OP posted, state parks are included in the parks presented, but you could easily see a list of 5 presented that has no state parks in it since the selection process appears to be random. It is also worth noting that if you do a search for State parks in OR, not all of them will get "10" ratings, in fact, most get ratings of ~8=8.5.

 

docj:

After reading your explanation, I pulled up Nebraska's page. It's first 3 listings under Popular Campgrounds in Nebraska were Auburn RV Park in Auburn, NE, Riverside City Park in Scottsbluff, NE, and Hall County Park in Grand Island, NE. These 3 parks had 12, 20, and 21 reviews respectively. Not exactly "popular" by any criteria on this site. Admittedly the other 2 parks on the list (Cabella's and Camp-a-Way) each had over 100 reviews. Then again, Cabella's is hardly a "camping" park. It is a decent overnight RV park on I-80 and/or just a way for the store to get more customers. Thus, I find this list rather irrational and, thus, useless and meaningless.

Also on the left side this initial state page is a listing of "Popular Camping Destinations". for Nebraska they show Ogallala (16), North Platte (15), and Sidney (10) leading the list. There is no explanation of what the numbers in parentheses are. I checked all 3 towns and those numbers (16, 15, and 10) are much higher than the number of parks listed under those towns. Once again, there is no explanation of the presented material.

 

Jerry, I don't disagree that, at present, little real "information" is being provided by this list. I know what the intent was but the execution is still lacking. If it, indeed, is intended to be a list of the most reviewed parks in a state, how would you deal with the fact that Cabella's might have more reviews than any other? What would you propose we do with the space the list now occupies?

This discrepancy between the numbers being displayed and the number of CGs in those cities has been reported by others and is in the queue of things to be fixed.

 

docj:

For starters, entitle the listing "Most Reviewed Parks in (name of state)". I've always had a problem with the terms camping and campgrounds as they are often used on this site. I actually tent camped as an adult for 15 years before I began traveling in an RV. I haven't "camped" since I bought my first RV 25 years ago. This improper word usage is another example of the dumbing down of America. I still refused to join the majority of Americans who believe that "reality" is TV shows like Survivor and the Kardashians. As for your question about what to do with the space, why do you have to put anything in it?

 

Jerry:

It sounds as if both of us would be in agreement on the topic of the dumbing down of America, but this isn't the right venue for such a discussion. But, irrespective of that, the issue of "camping" vs "RVing" is one that is often raised on RV forums.

Merriam Webster defines a campground to be:

an area or place that is used for camping : a place where people can put up a tent or park a camper and that usually has toilets and showers for campers to use

It would seem from that definition that campground is a superset that includes both traditional campgrounds and RV parks. Therefore, there is really no inconsistency with using both interchangeably. RVPR's database does include quite a few rustic CG's, many of which are on Forest Service or BLM land, that are primarily intended for "camping" rather than RVing.

In fact, using this definition, RVPR might better be called CampgroundReviews.com since Campground more properly includes both RV parks and other types of campgrounds. In fact, if you have never tried it, you may be surprised to learn that if you enter the URL: CampgroundReviews.com into your browser's address bar you will be taken to this very website.

In summary, it appears that the term "campground" has been broadened to the point where it is pretty much synonymous with an outdoor place at which people can spend a night. Is that a dumbing down of America or, simply, evidence of the evolution of the English language, I'm simply not enough of a scholar to know the answer.

As for the issue of why there should be lists of any sort on the Home Page, all I can say is that I have discovered that some people like lists and actually find them helpful. For example, we have a large number of users who "read" the new reviews list on a regular basis. Personally, I have no interest in it, but since it is of use to others we leave it on the page. I suspect the same is true of the Most Popular, and Most Frequently Reviewed lists. If we removed them, some subset of our users would howl.

Joel

 

Docj and Jerry S -
Thanks for getting the discussion going on this thread. I agree that the titles of "highly rated" and "popular" aren't helpful.
An example: Along the Oregon coast there are probably a total of about 5000 state park campsites in about 25 campgrounds. They are filled from June to September! I'd say that makes them "popular". They don't have RV Park amenities but they aren't needed or expected. They may not be "highly rated" by the full-timers because most sites aren't big rig friendly. They are campgrounds!
There are also several amazing "RV Parks" in Oregon that get great ratings. We've even stayed in several when we couldn't get reservations at a campground. Most of these RV Parks offered no privacy. However, most RVers who frequent them want 50 amp service, sewer, cable TV and evening garbage pickup.
Maybe Campgrounds and RV Parks could be rated separately.