QUOTE(gwbischoff @ Oct 25 2007, 11:29 AM) [snapback]8833[/snapback] 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. Yepper, I tend to average 5-8 myself. I think I start with a "5", and work up or down. As for the "should they or should they not" be annonymous...... Let's test this out. I'll volunteer to be a "guinea pig." I'll reveal a review that I did, and then you will see all other reviews I did. My favorite review that I posted, and I'm proud of how I worded it, is Paradise Point State Park in Ridgefield, WA. Ok, you all look at that one, and you will see my other reviews! Then, we can decide if we want to stay "anonymous." JJ
I would be a nice feature to include a Google Earth link with each park/campground. For example link to this one: http://www.buygold.net/tripusa2007/GoogleE...RV%20Resort.kml The park I'm staying at now. Cheers, Larry
I love the new feature. It allows me to look at other reviews of people that have posted reviews of our park. That puts their review of our park in much greater perspective. Thanks! Doug
LRebich, Someone else on this forum posted this site quite some time ago. www.epgsoft.com/CampgroundMap/ Course this is not an individual link with the actual review, but at least you can look up the CG/park on a Google Earth map.
QUOTE(gwbischoff @ Oct 25 2007, 01:29 PM) [snapback]8833[/snapback] 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. Well, actually, I would welcome people exploring the reasons for the numbers that I come up with or other notions about the campground I might put in the text of the review. It really isn't clear to me how that would start a proverbial 'food fight'. I would welcome people paying heed to my reviews because they feel I'm consistent. I would welcome people PMing me in regard to questions about the campground reviewed because some concern of theirs didn't make it into the body of the review. Of course, people that are inconsistent or who become known for downgrading a campground based on the weather, the tides, or the phases of the moon, are going to tend to be ignored. But wouldn't that be justice ??? After all, right now, they pretty much get away with wasting everyone else time with their useless reviews. Most of my time, now, is spent trying to filter out the wheat from the chaff. I know there are honest reviews out there but it can sometimes be hard to determine if a campground is really that bad or if a couple of people who are mad at the world have just managed to trash it. The corallary is the same: I have been to campgrounds that nearly everyone rates a '10' but where I would objectively rate the campground significantly lower. I can see how this can legitimately happen, but I'd like to have the chance to discount those inconsistant reviewers during my analysis.
QUOTE 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... I certainly think that it's fair to comment on the pricing in the review but I don't think it should ever figure into the rating. All of us have different pain thresholds when it comes to camping fees. It is service enough to objectively rate the campground and then let the user decide if it merits the cost. If I feel something is a particularly good or bad value, however, I'm not going to hesitate to mention that in the text of the review. One thing that I figured out when I bought an RV was that a lot of people counted on 'life' being free from there on out (after they dropped a hundred thousand dollars on the RV). Of course, their troubles were just beginning. The bottom line is, though, that a surprising number of RVers feel that it is their _right_ to have a free place to camp. They really get bent out of shape when they hear that some municipality is 'taking in the welcome mat' at the local WALMART.
QUOTE(Cheryl @ Oct 25 2007, 04:36 PM) [snapback]8834[/snapback] 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. But (it really is your name) and you are are pretty much naked here in the forum -- yet you still post. Couldn't someone just as easily jump all over you here ??? Actually, more easily since this forum is a give and take sort of medium while the reviews are in a database -- there is no way to directly comment on a review -- save for following it with a direct comment in another review (which can happen _now_, anyway). It seems to me that it would be easy enough to make a rule against that. If you took exception to a comment directed at your review by a following review, you could press the 'panic button' so that the 'webmaster' could edit out those 'illegal' comments. There are lots of people in the world that know who 'Testudo' is but they are mostly 'grownups' so I'm not too worried. I _would_ be a little worried if I had pasted my real name up there. It is hard to predict in this day and age how that information might be used. A little bit of a veil goes a long way and is a good thing. I would think that the 'webmaster' would be very amenable to having people change their (real) screen names to some fictional screen name if they were so inclined and had second thougths about using their real names. Having a transparent screen name just makes good sense regardless of whether or not the screen name of the submitter is being displayed in the reviews.
Thanks to the generosity of the Webmaster, I have been allowed to post a lot of reviews on this site. Some of those reviews have conflicted with other opinions on a campground and I have said as much in the review. I made every attempt to be tactful and anti-inflammatory in doing so. I am not interested in being right, but rather giving the right information that may be helpful to someone looking into a particular campground. We all have a personal standard for any stay at a campground, but that should not be the criteria for any rating. When giving a review, if we can detach ourselves from personal preferences and comfort, then the ratings will be mostly accurate. It is also appropriate to remember that we have different rigs. What may be important for the luxury coach is not so for the tent camper. Think about both parties when providing a review. I don’t know where my number average is in the rating process, but it doesn’t matter. I suspect that it’s higher than most despite the fact that I’m a hard rater. That is because I seek out the better campgrounds in the first place. Thanks to those on this site who do accurate ratings, include info about the basics and additional amenities, and leave out the non-essential personal opinions, I’ve been happy with most of my choices of places to stay. I thank all of you for that input. As for the anonymity issue, I would respectfully suggest this – The best way to win an argument is not to participate in it. I love the DELETE button.
RLM you started me thinking and wondering what the average rating number was for the reviews we had done. We have an average of just shy of seven, (6.78). We have not reviewed a great number of Cgs, fourteen, as we have chosen to return to the same local acceptable establishments. We do not have the time off, at this point, to travel longer distances, the wife is still working. We keep telling ourselves, "some day" !! But we do spend the month of September traveling and visiting points of interests within the State of Maine. We have visited Maine every year for the last twenty.
QUOTE But (it really is your name) and you are are pretty much naked here in the forum -- yet you still post. Couldn't someone just as easily jump all over you here ??? Yes it is easy to get "jumped on" here. That's why I usually just post if I have helpful information and very rarely do I post in threads that have a lot of "personal" opinions.
I like the new features. It really helped when deciding on a campground for our upcoming trip in December. I happened to find a reviewer who had stayed at some of the same type of campgrounds we use and rated them similar to us. I have also found we frequent the same campgrounds every year like Butch, so our ratings average out to be around 8. I am also like several others in that I do my homework, so we tend to stay at some of the better campgrounds and resorts. I would also like to commend the webmaster on a job well done. Due to this site, we had an outstanding month long trip this summer because we were able to pick campgrounds and parks that suited our needs.
-------------------- QUOTE(Webmaster @ Oct 23 2007, 05:38 PM) [snapback]8790[/snapback] Hi everyone, I've been sneaking new stuff onto the site lately... More coming soon! -------------------- I am loving this site! Very cool to click on all the other places a reviewer has made postings. Thanks for a great place to do research AND the chance to share ideas with the FORUM feature.
Like many others, I am getting a kick out of being able to peruse all the reviews of any poster. I particularly enjoy checking out the reviews of of some of the more active (30+ reviews) members. I was originally interested in seeing how their opinions of parks I have been to compare to mine. While doing this I began to notice some minor, but interesting, inconsistencies in some of the reviews of some of these reviewers. One said "never give a 10" but had given several 10s 6-12 months earlier. Another said "doesn't give many 10s", but had given almost 20 before that and about 25 overall. Having personally been to 14 of those 25 parks, I was curious about why my 8s and 9s were 10s to him/her. It seems to boil down to them having a big rig with satellite TV and phone WIFI, thus not needing park provided Cable or WIFI. They also seem not to care about recreational facilities (pool, playground, etc.) . As long as the park and its' sites can handle their rig and they have no problems, the park can get a 10. Another example of differnt strokes.
Jerry, I feel the same way. It would have to be an awwsome park to rate a 10. There are many that give 10s just because they have a good time. Maybe we need a fun rating.
QUOTE(Big Ben @ Dec 5 2007, 08:28 AM) [snapback]9362[/snapback] Jerry, I feel the same way. It would have to be an awwsome park to rate a 10. There are many that give 10s just because they have a good time. Maybe we need a fun rating. I think, among the many "individual things" we have to say yes or no to, the webmaster should add.... "staff helpful?" To me, a great staff that bends over backwards to help you out deserves a point or two..... JJ
i like seeing all the reviews. good idea and good job webmaster. this is a great site. the idea about putting the campground staff up in individual things is another good idea.
Hi folks Just put some reviews on the site this afternoon. Love the new addition of seeing how many reviews a person has done as it helps judge the review. However the new addition of a split screen on the listing of the reviews under a campground makes it very difficult to read the reviews easily. What do other people think or is it me? Capper in snowy Colorado
Stupid me. I thought the new format for the reviews screen was a hugh goof-up. Now that I realize this was done on purpose I have to say no no no no no! This is not good. You constantly have to scroll back and forth as well as up and down. A huge inconvenience. Webmaster, I know you were trying to make an improvement and I still appreciate your time and effort to make this a good site. But this newest change is not for the better. Perhaps you could explain why you made this change and how it was supposed to be an improvement.
QUOTE(Butch @ Nov 9 2007, 07:23 AM) [snapback]9082[/snapback] RLM you started me thinking and wondering what the average rating number was for the reviews we had done. We have an average of just shy of seven, (6.78). We have not reviewed a great number of Cgs, fourteen, as we have chosen to return to the same local acceptable establishments. We do not have the time off, at this point, to travel longer distances, the wife is still working. We keep telling ourselves, "some day" !! But we do spend the month of September traveling and visiting points of interests within the State of Maine. We have visited Maine every year for the last twenty. Butch> You are making me jealous. I have wanted to do Maine for several years now, but for one reason or the other, it hasn't happened. When it does, I'll be asking for your opinions on where and what to do.
