Hi everyone, I've been sneaking new stuff onto the site lately. A few weeks ago, we added phone number for campgrounds. About 60% of the campgrounds in the system now have phone number, and hopefully all of them will be in there by the end of the year. Today I moved Sewer and WiFi up in the ammenities, so that electric, water, sewer, and wifi were together. Today I also added the ability to view other a users other reviews, and changed it so that campground links as well as the other reviews links will open in new windows or tabs depending on your web browser. The reviews without these links are either from one-hit-wonders, or are too old to have the required information to link them in. Viewing users other reviews will help everyone to weed out bad reviews or bad reviewers. Some people aren't happy anywhere, and this will show those people. I'm sure you will also find some campground owners that have posted reviews, and some will stick out like sore thumbs when you view all their reviews together. (If you find any of these, please email me the CGID of the campground and the text of the the reviewers review.) Your reviews are what makes the site great, and hopefully these new additions will make your experience even better on the site. More coming soon!
Great new feature addition to the postings. I have often wondered exactly what type person rated our favorite park low when all the other ratings were 10 of 10. Tonight I looked at the other 72 reviews this person posted on this particular park and as I thought,,,,maybe 5 out of 72 postings were 10/10, with most being 6 or less without much explanation. Like you said some people will never be happy and this clearly let you know the hard to please camper from the ones that come for a great visit rather than to nit pick a place to pieces. Thank you for adding the option to see what type person we're hearing from.
Great feature and you were still able to keep the reviewers anonymous! Definitely no webmaster abuse needed here!!!!!
I think I should say "ditto" for all the changes. This is just great. I love the ability to see other reviews posted by a particular rater. Sometimes if there is an anomalous rating in a string of ratings now you can get some perspective from previous (or lack of) posts by the anomalous poster. Actually, it's easy to categorize the basher as well as the one-time owner trying to save his CGs ratings with a rebuttal. GOOD WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CHEER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! B)
Looks like all the early risers voiced my thoughts long before I opened my eyes this morning so I will just say ditto to all the other comments. Also thanks to the webmaster. You done good!!!!!
I'm giddy... Just an idea going forward. The addition of a picture(s) would be great. I don;t know how it would affect the site's bandwidth, etc. But if a user were able to upload a picture of their site (and not have to depend on the campground's website or brochure) that would be great. But, again, great job!
I have spent all afternoon reading and comparing reviews. It has been both a lot of fun and very informative. It has confirmed some of the things that I (and probably others) suspected. For instance, I was looking at one reviewer’s posts and discovered that he/she gave a lot of 1’s and 2’s to places that normally got 8-10’s. But the really interesting thing was that I could also see that this person had reviewed the same places again a few months later with pretty much the same ratings and comments. I can’t believe this person stayed at all these parks a second time after blasting them the first time so I can only assume he/she added a second review to make the place look really bad. Being able to see that the bad reviews were from the same person certainly affects my consideration of staying at the place. This is just one example how this new feature will be valuable to us, and I’m sure there will be other ways also. In addition I hope this will help keep reviewers a little more honest and objective so that campgrounds will truly get the ratings they deserve—good or bad.
Yeah, no kidding. I just was looking at a few that rated about a dozen or so parks with every one rated at a 1 or a 2. I'm trying to figure out if they just use this site as a b!7ch-board, the campgrounds are really that bad, or if they're just angry people. Man, if you're having that bad of a time everytime you go out just sell the dang thing.
Great Improvement. If a person has made only a few reviews about the same park, the reviews do not have much value. Most of the reviewers do an OUTSTANDING job. I really learn from the comments. Keep up the good work. I do not think that the picture idea will work. Slow load when you are "on the road". Keep up the good work!!!!!!
Way to go, "Webmaster" !!! I _like_ the new feature. It provides good evidence of the reviewer's general point of view... QUOTE Some people aren't happy anywhere, and this will show those people. I'm sure you will also find some campground owners that have posted reviews, and some will stick out like sore thumbs when you view all their reviews together. No kidding! After spotting the new feature, I quickly went and checked out an example review -- someone with a good number of posts, and, found that the chosen individual was _never_ happy with _anyplace_ he/she had ever stayed [grin!]. I had stayed at one of the places on the resulting comparison output page and I found the review both harsh and focused on issues that the campground management had no control over (eg. -- the weather !!!). Don't get me wrong, _commenting_ on the weather or the cleanlines of the bathrooms when you were _there_ is one thing but 'scoring' the management on the weather is something else [grin!]. To some extent, everybody is going to have a different concept of the point scoring. Some people are going to be minimalists (if it seemed like a campground, it gets a 'half-star') and some people are going to assign a '10' to every campground that they find merely 'adequate'. Personally, I think I would be shooting for an objective scoring system that would tend to average around '6' or '7' points. I've been using a system ("scoring at home") based on campground "attractiveness"; area attractions; campground facilities; attitude of owners and staff; and big-rig accessibility (...which I could care less about, but, big-rig owners are the dominant users here). I use a simple averaging system based on either 'average', 'below average', and 'above average', appraisals and find the results to be consistent with my overall sense of my campground experiences. QUOTE Great feature and you were still able to keep the reviewers anonymous! You lost me, there, 'Cheryl' (if that _really_ is your name [grin!]). Why do the reviews need to be "anonymous"??? Since the 'user name' is "made-up" (anonymous), if you want it to be, why is that a problem? I don't believe 'Cheryl Fuller' is really Cheryl Fuller, for example. Probably just a made-up name for commercial purposes, like "Tom Cruise" or "George Bush" [grin!]. While I find the new feature _very_ useful, I would still like to see the user name appended to the review. Other than limitations of the database, I can't really see why this would be a problem or a 'bad thing'. If someone is using their real name (not really a good idea, online!) and would prefer anonymity, it seems to me they could simply start a new (anonymous) user name and go forward with that. QUOTE Just an idea going forward. The addition of a picture(s) would be great. I don;t know how it would affect the site's bandwidth, etc. But if a user were able to upload a picture of their site (and not have to depend on the campground's website or brochure) that would be great. A picture that conveyed the feeling of a campground, would be nice -- especially for non-commercial campgrounds where pictures are seldom otherwise available. Pictures stored off site (eg. PHOTOBUCKET) would have no real impact as far as phpBB is concerned. I don't see why the review screen _couldn't_ generate a picture (supplied as a JPEG path). A lot of phpBB webmasters don't like to have HTML turned _on_ (thus necessitating the use of JPEG images stored on sharing sites like PHOTOBUCKET) because of the security hastles. This makes it more difficult for end users to successfully deal with pictures. Also, there is the problem of getting useful and appropriate pictures that are properly sized for the review output page. 'Deceased' JPEG pathways would generate a lot of 'noise' in the body of the review page and/or result in a considerable maintenance chore (prunning the 'dead' paths). QUOTE I do not think that the picture idea will work. Slow load when you are "on the road". This is not a problem since phpBB allows the end user to 'turn off' pictures for use in low bandwidth applications. Still, I think there are probably too many 'look and feel' issues that would sway 'Webmaster' away from allowing pictures in the body of the review. Not the same thing, but if somebody really wanted to share pictures, they could do so in a Forum topic and maybe 'Webmaster' would see fit to allow a reference in the review to pictures available in the Forum.
I think that the reviews should still remain anonymous. There's too much potential for a war of words based on a review and then it can become personal. I found out something about myself, too. I looked over the collection of my reviews and noticed that the vast majority were in the 6-8 range. I was wondering if that was due to the fact that I'm easily pleased or if it is because I try to do my homework and don't take a huge amount of risks when picking a CG.
QUOTE Why do the reviews need to be "anonymous"?? I think having to put a name (real or your user name) on your review would stop some people from submitting reviews. If you gave a bad review to a place that some people love, they would really jump all over you on this forum. Nobody should have to be attacked for giving their personal opinion on a place. Yes, it really is my name.
I am also on the side of keeping reviews anonymous. GW: I think you probably rate places in the 6-8 range for both of the reasons you mention. You probably are easy to please and you do your homework so that you know you are picking a good park. Both of these things make for a much more pleasant stay.
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Oct 25 2007, 07:14 PM) [snapback]8842[/snapback] I am also on the side of keeping reviews anonymous. GW: I think you probably rate places in the 6-8 range for both of the reasons you mention. You probably are easy to please and you do your homework so that you know you are picking a good park. Both of these things make for a much more pleasant stay. Yeah, I'd agree. I think that there are a lot of people who make their camping choice based on price alone. Some on necessity and I understand that. We're also the type of campers who do a lot of activities while on vacation. Frankly, we don't spend a heckuva lot of time in the campground itself. Once our kids are older and on their own and my wife and I are in a position to spend more time "at camp" I might get a little more super-critical of campsites. But, for right now, if a CG meets our basic needs and is relatively quiet, it's a 7.
QUOTE(gwbischoff @ Oct 26 2007, 11:20 AM) [snapback]8850[/snapback] QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Oct 25 2007, 07:14 PM) [snapback]8842[/snapback] I am also on the side of keeping reviews anonymous. GW: I think you probably rate places in the 6-8 range for both of the reasons you mention. You probably are easy to please and you do your homework so that you know you are picking a good park. Both of these things make for a much more pleasant stay. Yeah, I'd agree. I think that there are a lot of people who make their camping choice based on price alone. Some on necessity and I understand that. We're also the type of campers who do a lot of activities while on vacation. Frankly, we don't spend a heckuva lot of time in the campground itself. Once our kids are older and on their own and my wife and I are in a position to spend more time "at camp" I might get a little more super-critical of campsites. But, for right now, if a CG meets our basic needs and is relatively quiet, it's a 7. I"m with you. Our kids are grown but We also do our homework and try and visit good campgrounds. We really haven't been out of the state, our jobs don't allow the time needed yet so we are used to paying higher prices here in California. We like the coast and most places are $65 and up. Compare that to a hotel room right on the beach at $200+ it's a bargain. My ratings are around 7 or 8's. Haven't had the pleasure yet of a 1 or 2. Just my opinion
QUOTE(rodman @ Oct 26 2007, 02:54 PM) [snapback]8855[/snapback] QUOTE(gwbischoff @ Oct 26 2007, 11:20 AM) [snapback]8850[/snapback] QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Oct 25 2007, 07:14 PM) [snapback]8842[/snapback] I am also on the side of keeping reviews anonymous. GW: I think you probably rate places in the 6-8 range for both of the reasons you mention. You probably are easy to please and you do your homework so that you know you are picking a good park. Both of these things make for a much more pleasant stay. Yeah, I'd agree. I think that there are a lot of people who make their camping choice based on price alone. Some on necessity and I understand that. We're also the type of campers who do a lot of activities while on vacation. Frankly, we don't spend a heckuva lot of time in the campground itself. Once our kids are older and on their own and my wife and I are in a position to spend more time "at camp" I might get a little more super-critical of campsites. But, for right now, if a CG meets our basic needs and is relatively quiet, it's a 7. I"m with you. Our kids are grown but We also do our homework and try and visit good campgrounds. We really haven't been out of the state, our jobs don't allow the time needed yet so we are used to paying higher prices here in California. We like the coast and most places are $65 and up. Compare that to a hotel room right on the beach at $200+ it's a bargain. My ratings are around 7 or 8's. Haven't had the pleasure yet of a 1 or 2. Just my opinion I hear you. When I see people complaining about spending $25 for a campsite I immediately think to myself "You don't stay in California much, do you?". Everything's relative. If you can find a good $20/night place out here tell me... But I digress... Keep up the good work with the upgrades...
