QUOTE(Galli @ Sep 26 2009, 01:03 AM) [snapback]19238[/snapback] Ha, ha, ha, no matter what we decide there is always the reverse side of the medal. In my opinion the most reliable report would be undertaken by an inspector, namely, an officer from the tourist office of the state or province or Hotel guidelines that gives you the level of the hotel and importance, the specific facilities (gym, swimming pool sauna etc...) and rating. Since the above may be considered an utopia, the second best thing should be a factual comment regarding, namely, number of space available in the resort , if there is the SPA or swimming pool, club house, how far is from the near city, if there is internet, the cost per day or month or ??? etc.. etc.. etc.. We have this already. There are several RV park directories out there that list exactly what you have said. (There are even some on-line.) They are supposed to be factual and unbiased so there are no reviews by individuals, just a rating from the "inspectors" who are supposed to follow a specific procedure. Each park is measured against a standardized list of facilities, amenities, and services and is then rated based on the availability and quality of those items. The physical description of facilities and the list of amenities is generally pretty accurate. However, there is still a problem with the ratings, and not everyone who stays at the campground will agree with the inspector's rating. As stated on this forum many times that is because campers want different things from a campground. Some want a more manicured resort type setting while others prefer a rustic, natural environment. It is unlikely that these two types of campers will rate a park the same way. But (and here's what makes this site so good) if they can make comments as to why they gave a particular rating, the rest of us will be able to easily determine if this is the type of place we would like or not based on our own preferences. The person who likes resorts may give a park a 9-10 and say how beautifully landscaped it was. The person who likes the wilderness may give the same place a 3-4 and say it was all concrete with no fire rings. If I only saw the ratings I would not know who to believe, but the comments tell me a lot, and I can make a much more informed decision. QUOTE This would give an idea regarding the place and the new person that is planning to spent time there will ask the forum's opinion and evaluate all responses received. The advantage for having an input from several persons will encompass different the point of view of the place This is what the comments do now. Members give their opinions which "encompass different the point of view of the place." Essentially they write about their stay one time, and they are finished. Following your suggestion ("the new person that is planning to spent time there will ask the forum's opinion and evaluate all responses received") would require members to continually rewrite and repeat their opinion many times (although I doubt that anyone would do that). That would get old pretty fast, and the result would be that no one would want to put that much time and energy into answering the same questions over and over again, and they would stop participating. I have no problem if some members want to ask specific questions about a place they are considering staying at, and I am sure they will get some responses. However, I do not see that procedure as the best way to run this site. (BTW I guess this response does not have anything to do with slanderous reviews either. Sorry to be off topic, but I wanted to reply to the previous poster.)
QUOTE(gilda @ Sep 26 2009, 07:44 AM) [snapback]19239[/snapback] HUH ??? I'm not sure that you understand this discussion. You want an inspector from a state agency to inspect and report to you? Or report here? Or ??? As for wanting specific information on parks....ALL decent parks have web sites. On websites, the info you are looking for is there. If it is not there, then call the campground and ask the question. What does any of this have to do with a slanderous review? To be honest, regarding a slanderous review...nothing can be done, unfortunately. Just as everything in life, the web is available for ANYONE to post ANYTHING, good or bad about whatever they please. It's up to individuals to remember that there's a whole lot of idiots in this world who enjoy slamming and discrediting anyone they can. An inteligent person takes internet reviews with a grain of salt (for ANY business). Unless someone you know and trust tell you that Joe's diner is terrible, you should give Joe's diner the benefit of the doubt and check it out for yourself. As for campgrounds being given the opportunity for a "rebuttel", I don't see how that could work. It would simply start a nasty "he said/she said", and an embarresment for all. It's a nobody wins situation. Just realize that ....JUST BECAUSE ITS ON THE WEB, DOESNT MEAN IT's TRUE. Hi and yes, I appreciate your point, however and from your words you are assuming that people, in general, knows where to look and how to evaluate what's published on the webpage of a specific campsite. Second issue, I personally don't need an inspector or an organization in order to find out a given camp status but several persons are not familiar in this field and they need some thing to relay on . Now and without offence, if you are a camp owner, I am pretty sure that whatever you put on your website may be accurate up to a certain extent since you “will not” publish, as a promotion, some thing detrimental to your own business. Back to the original subject, if you read my message, I made a “preamble” that it is an "utopia" to believe that an inspectorate system will materialize, notwithstanding that and in my opinion it should be a sure way to take for granted an inspector's evaluation. In closing the subject, the inspector is no going to report to a single person but its findings would be published on an RV campsite manual which will not be subsidized by camp owners but part of the State, Country or County that have an interested in promoting business in their part of the world; as an indication, some thing like it is done by the hotels in all N. America. I hope that my words are now clearing any doubts from your part.
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Sep 26 2009, 10:13 AM) [snapback]19244[/snapback] We have this already. There are several RV park directories out there that list exactly what you have said. (There are even some on-line.) They are supposed to be factual and unbiased so there are no reviews by individuals, just a rating from the "inspectors" who are supposed to follow a specific procedure. Each park is measured against a standardized list of facilities, amenities, and services and is then rated based on the availability and quality of those items. The physical description of facilities and the list of amenities is generally pretty accurate. However, there is still a problem with the ratings, and not everyone who stays at the campground will agree with the inspector's rating. As stated on this forum many times that is because campers want different things from a campground. Some want a more manicured resort type setting while others prefer a rustic, natural environment. It is unlikely that these two types of campers will rate a park the same way. But (and here's what makes this site so good) if they can make comments as to why they gave a particular rating, the rest of us will be able to easily determine if this is the type of place we would like or not based on our own preferences. The person who likes resorts may give a park a 9-10 and say how beautifully landscaped it was. The person who likes the wilderness may give the same place a 3-4 and say it was all concrete with no fire rings. If I only saw the ratings I would not know who to believe, but the comments tell me a lot, and I can make a much more informed decision. This is what the comments do now. Members give their opinions which "encompass different the point of view of the place." Essentially they write about their stay one time, and they are finished. Following your suggestion ("the new person that is planning to spent time there will ask the forum's opinion and evaluate all responses received") would require members to continually rewrite and repeat their opinion many times (although I doubt that anyone would do that). That would get old pretty fast, and the result would be that no one would want to put that much time and energy into answering the same questions over and over again, and they would stop participating. I have no problem if some members want to ask specific questions about a place they are considering staying at, and I am sure they will get some responses. However, I do not see that procedure as the best way to run this site. (BTW I guess this response does not have anything to do with slanderous reviews either. Sorry to be off topic, but I wanted to reply to the previous poster.) quote =We have this already. There are several RV park directories out there that list exactly what you have said. (There are even some on-line.) They are supposed to be factual and unbiased so there are no reviews by individuals, just a rating from the "inspectors" who are supposed to follow a specific procedure. Each park is measured against a standardized list of facilities, amenities, and services and is then rated based on the availability and quality of those items. The physical description of facilities and the list of amenities is generally pretty accurate. However, there is still a problem with the ratings, and not everyone who stays at the campground will agree with the inspector's rating Unquote. Your answer is somewhat incomplete, you state DIRECTORIES plural, do you mean that each state or province has one and who's financing it/them ?, if it is supported by camp owners...well my credibility regarding what's on it is somewhat reduced. If you do refer to some thing like WOODHALL, well, if you pay for it they will advertise a tend as a castle.. Unless is recently changed, the only thing reliable there is the fact that, there is a campground in that place
Reviews by Woodalls and Sams are basically "bought" by the campgrounds. The bigger your ad, the better the rating. What other sites are you referring to?
Yes, I was referring to Woolalls and Trailer Life (and their on-line versions), and yes, I have heard that the bigger the ad the better the rating, but remember I said that these are good for the basic information--number of sites, paved or gravel, size of sites, utilities, pool, cable TV etc.--not for the rating, which can be influenced. The idea that there would be "an RV campsite manual which will not be subsidized by camp owners but part of the State, Country or County that have an interested in promoting business in their part of the world" is a utopian thought. In traveling I have run across many state, regional, county, and city publications that list campgrounds in their area, but the fact is these are still produced by some organization that is trying to get you to stay in their area, and therefore, they may be biased. Even if the individual campgrounds are not actually rated in these publications, their write up could be influenced by the ad they bought or by who they know, so again these are good for the basic information only. QUOTE some thing like it is done by the hotels in all N. America. I am unfamiliar with this. What is it called? If it is truly unbiased and lists only the facilities then it may be pretty good for helping someone locate a hotel. However, without some kind of a rating system how would a person know the quality of the place, and because any time people are involved with ratings there will be bias and subjectivity, and this brings us full circle.
QUOTE without some kind of a rating system how would a person know the quality of the place, and because any time people are involved with ratings there will be bias and subjectivity, and this brings us full circle. You are so right. And hence, here we are with campgroundreviews.com. Too bad, no other resources. It is a fine site for what it is, and I know the hard work that goes into it. I would love to see a forum tied in to the review site, where you could add a comment regarding what was posted. (such as a rebuttal)
Slander works both ways in my experience (ref; original thread post) The campsite we worked at this summer was continually making up stories to get people evicted, & they went through campworkers like a donkey can eat strawberries!!! They also lied about campworkers hours worked to Corporate, & had them looking after their residence when they should have been doing more neccessary site related jobs. The managers are not always right, & let's be honest, many campground managers are just ordinary campworkers with the ability to pull the wool over corporate's eyes & promote themselves as efficient to get the manager's job!
QUOTE(Insider info @ Sep 28 2009, 04:16 PM) [snapback]19298[/snapback] Slander works both ways in my experience (ref; original thread post) The campsite we worked at this summer was continually making up stories to get people evicted, & they went through campworkers like a donkey can eat strawberries!!! They also lied about campworkers hours worked to Corporate, & had them looking after their residence when they should have been doing more neccessary site related jobs. The managers are not always right, & let's be honest, many campground managers are just ordinary campworkers with the ability to pull the wool over corporate's eyes & promote themselves as efficient to get the manager's job! Sorry you had a bad work experience. I am curious why you did not just leave? Regardless of your work experience, a campground review should be a review of the campground experience, not the work experience of an employee. At the very least, if you feel you must post a negative review, be truthful and disclose the fact you were an employee posting the review. Don't pretend to be a camper.
I've been camping for 5 years now and just started adding reviews. I usually go on weekends for 2 nights and try to review the campground Sunday morning while packing up. We write our review as a group so we can be very percise while it is fresh in our minds. To us, (6 adults and 6 kids), the review is something we look forward to and talk about all weekend. We never tell the staff about our reviews and try to remain open minded. Our personal rules to reviewing are to remember that we are camping. We are not at a hotel. There are no walls to block noise, light and smell. Remember that lies can hurt the owners (good lies and bad). Leaving a review is the same as tipping a waiter - good service = good review = more income And bad service (unkept grounds, rude staff, failure to enforce THEIR rules etc...) = bad review = less income. Slanderous reviews should not be tollerated. I honestly have avoided campgrounds with multiple bad reviews and I may be missing out on the time of my life. Remember, it's a campground, not the Ritz-Carlton. People need to come with low expectations and leave wowed
QUOTE(meatwagon45 @ Sep 29 2009, 08:33 AM) [snapback]19323[/snapback] I've been camping for 5 years now and just started adding reviews. I usually go on weekends for 2 nights and try to review the campground Sunday morning while packing up. We write our review as a group so we can be very percise while it is fresh in our minds. To us, (6 adults and 6 kids), the review is something we look forward to and talk about all weekend. We never tell the staff about our reviews and try to remain open minded. Our personal rules to reviewing are to remember that we are camping. We are not at a hotel. There are no walls to block noise, light and smell. Remember that lies can hurt the owners (good lies and bad). Leaving a review is the same as tipping a waiter - good service = good review = more income And bad service (unkept grounds, rude staff, failure to enforce THEIR rules etc...) = bad review = less income. Slanderous reviews should not be tollerated. I honestly have avoided campgrounds with multiple bad reviews and I may be missing out on the time of my life. Remember, it's a campground, not the Ritz-Carlton. People need to come with low expectations and leave wowed Hi meatwagon45, if what all of you are doing with competence and honesty, I think it is a proper way to evaluate campgrounds, my problem now is, how we identify your group versus the general review on this forum ? Furthermore and now is more a matter of criteria, how do you choose the campground, is it in accordance to your preference or any campground in a specific area ? Mind you , I agree 100%, namely, a group of people with different requirements and age combining their feeling and put them down in a report but your impact on this market will be so minimal that shall not make a dent on the system; on top of that, your group of 5 or 6 persons (I am just quoting a possible number of people) go each week in a different place, in all year it will be 52 campsites evaluated only, what we need is an organization financed by the state, province, county..etc… NOT BY THE CAMP RESOURS to build up some thing reliable . In my opinion the state, province..etc…are receiving a revenue from campers that spend time in their area, therefore and in order to increase this revenue, they should monitor and evaluate the places that provide this service. Honestly, I am not too familiar in how the system works but, I am sure that a good system can be built for the benefit of both part involved.
QUOTE(meatwagon45 @ Sep 29 2009, 10:33 AM) [snapback]19323[/snapback] I honestly have avoided campgrounds with multiple bad reviews and I may be missing out on the time of my life. But here's the thing: if a review is libelous with the intent of hurting a campground it will probably be the only bad one among several other good reviews. If there are "multiple bad reviews" as you've stated then they are probably accurate and truthful and you may not be missing out on much after all.
QUOTE(gilda @ Sep 26 2009, 01:17 PM) [snapback]19249[/snapback] Reviews by Woodalls and Sams are basically "bought" by the campgrounds. The bigger your ad, the better the rating. What other sites are you referring to? Now there is a statement that I do not agree on. When they come to our park they have a pre set criteria and from what I have seen they stick to it. I am speaking of Good Sam. We even had a follow up visit from a Good Sam rep. after the regular inspection to check to make sure it had been done properly. Do I agree with all of their rating system? No. But it is theirs and that is how they do it. If you have any question as to how they arrived at a particular rating. I believe that they still put the actual form in the Trailer Life book you buy each year. As any it is a guideline. Buy the way my park is rated the same regardless of the ad I may or may not purchase. The problem is that we as individuals have different ideas as to what is good or bad based on what we may need or not need. Some people should just stay a expensive motor coach resorts period. Some need lots of open spaces. Some want 50 amps only. Some like to socialize and some want to be left alone and some cannot even tolerate having a neighbor. I can go on and on. We all see examples of this when we travel.
I don't want the government doing CG reviews. I think we can figure it out without another bureaucracy.
As an RV Resort manager, I have written to the moderators on more than one occasion to protest false and slanderous reviews. I have never once heard back. One reviewer posted TWO false reviews in the same month for a total of FOUR reviews ever on their account. Both have lies and mis-represent what really happened. No rebuttals allowed. Also, I read in the rules on here that a reviewer may not review the same park/resort within 90 days. Now, that being said, we get stellar reviews and treat people with respect. The good reviews out-weigh the bad 20 to 1. In time, her FALSE reviews will be way down stream from all the great reviews. Review sites like these must be too busy to follow up on items like complaints & slander. In fact, our business (and all rv parks) is the reason this website even exists. Therefore, I feel websites like these are compelled to follow up on complaints and enforce their own rules. It keeps the system honest.
RVfan, You are correct that the rules prohibit anyone from posting a second review for any given park within a 90 day period. The system is supposed to automatically catch and reject these so I cannot say why this happened in your case. However, if you will send me a personal message with the name and location of your resort, I will have an admin look into it.
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Oct 13 2009, 06:54 PM) [snapback]19516[/snapback] RVfan, You are correct that the rules prohibit anyone from posting a second review for any given park within a 90 day period. The system is supposed to automatically catch and reject these so I cannot say why this happened in your case. However, if you will send me a personal message with the name and location of your resort, I will have an admin look into it. 1 review has been removed. Thank your for the assistance.
QUOTE(RVfan @ Oct 16 2009, 05:21 PM) [snapback]19579[/snapback] 1 review has been removed. Thank your for the assistance. I'd like to take credit, but since you never sent me the name of your park I guess one of the admins found it by accident. As I said there should not have been two reviews by the same person within a 90 day period so I guess someone just caught it when they were checking for errors and changed it. Either way I'm glad the error was corrected.
I will say that any one review can be bad and it does not matter but if the majority of them say the same thing and then you read the reviews that person wrote on other campgrounds you can get a feel for the reviewer and the review. I know I have written reviews of campgrounds that were not very good and others that were pretty nice. It was in relationship to the campground and the experience not any vindictiveness.
What are interesting are the bad or good reviews, worded very much the same, that appear at three month intervals for the same parks, but written by different reviewers or so we are to believe. It certainly seems like a personal vendetta or a park owner or manager writing them. EVERY three months is stretching the rules of coincidence.
QUOTE(jobob @ Oct 17 2009, 07:33 PM) [snapback]19592[/snapback] What are interesting are the bad or good reviews, worded very much the same, that appear at three month intervals for the same parks, but written by different reviewers or so we are to believe. It certainly seems like a personal vendetta or a park owner or manager writing them. EVERY three months is stretching the rules of coincidence. If you would cite a few of these parks, maybe the site admins would look at these suspicious reviews. -- Dave Rudisill Dunsmuir, CA
