Review Not Posted As We Didn't Visit Park

There was a "did not stay" review for the Grand Canyon Camper Park in Tusayan, AZ back in April. The reviewer only stopped to use the park's dump station. The entire review was about the dump station. According to the parameters discussed here, how does this "review" rate being posted?

 

Doesn't this fall under describing "the condition of the utilities?"

 

QUOTE(dalsgal @ Jul 1 2014, 03:34 PM) [snapback]37122[/snapback]

tiff, I have never made that type of mistake before but should it happen and someone set up in our yard/drive they would be towed out by the police.





By posting this statement .... I assume you are a park owner or have an affiliation with a particular c/g ?

 

QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Jul 1 2014, 11:12 PM) [snapback]37133[/snapback]

Doesn't this fall under describing "the condition of the utilities?"




Am I understanding this correctly....... someone can stop at a campground to use the dump station for 1/2 hour....not spend ONE night there or use any other facilities ....they can post a review about their dump experience ?? Then someone who stays at a campground for 1/2 a month ...and uses the dump station and ALL the other facilities.... but doesn't get time to post their review for 6 months....their review will not get posted ?

Doesn't seem right to me. But I understand......rules are rules.

 

QUOTE(tiffinman @ Jul 2 2014, 04:20 AM) [snapback]37135[/snapback]

Am I understanding this correctly....... someone can stop at a campground to use the dump station for 1/2 hour....not spend ONE night there or use any other facilities ....they can post a review about their dump experience ?? Then someone who stays at a campground for 1/2 a month ...and uses the dump station and ALL the other facilities.... but doesn't get time to post their review for 6 months....their review will not get posted ?

Doesn't seem right to me. But I understand......rules are rules.




You appear to be making an "apples and oranges" comparison here. The "did not stay" rule is totally independent of the "within six months" rule that this site has. It's irrelevant if the reviewer used the dump site or stayed there for the entire winter; if the review is submitted more than six months after the stay ended, it is not acceptable.

As has been mentioned before, conditions and staff at RV parks change over time and older reviews are less relevant than newer ones. We use 6 months as a cut-off; no question but that's an arbitrary cut-off, but some time limit had to be selected and that' the one we have chosen.

 

docj.......I understand what your saying.... but .....I was just trying to relay the importance and accuracy of the two posts. Is the 1/2 hour visit review going to be more fair and accurate then a 1/2 month visit review ?

I'd rather rely on a six month old post of someone who spent some time in a particular c/g......rather then a current " did not stay " review of a member who just drove thru a c/g.

That's just my opinion.....sorry if you don't agree.

 

tiffinman, I have submitted a "did not stay there" review for a campground in northern New Brunswick a few years back. This park had never been reviewed by any rvparkreviews member before. I just stopped in front of it for lunch, and as there are very few campgrounds listed for that area I felt it was a good service for my fellow rvers to mention its existence and give as many details as possible about it. Not soon after other members reviewed it, and their conclusions were close to mine. One member even mentioned that he was happy to have been able to ride out a storm there, so my review was certainly of help to others.

So a "did not stay there" review can be important, and should be accepted based on the particular circumstances of the posting.

 

wprigge..... I appreciate your good service to fellow RV's as do others ........and I'm sure your " did not stay "review was very important .

On the other hand.... I submitted a review of a park where I had spent extended time.... that had major changes going on with new ownership....new sites...and new services. This I felt would have been a good service to fellow RV's visiting that area. Unfortunately it didn't get posted because I was truthful about the time of my stay. Sure I could have falsified the stay dates.....but how does that benefit anyone ? I also feel that review should have been accepted based on the particular circumstances of the posting.


I don't want to get into an argument over this..... I'll just continue my traveling.... and play by all the rules. Thank You

 

Cdntravelmom,
This reminded me of a Seinfeld episode. Jerry Seinfeld was at a car rental and they didn't have a car although he made a reservation. He continued to explain to the clerk he did not believe the clerk understood what the word 'reservation' meant- obviously if they did, there would be a car in the lot for him to fulfill their commitment and part of the contract per the 'reservation.
The Merriam- Webster site defines reservation as ": an arrangement to have something (such as a room, table, or seat) held for your use at a later time" (2014, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reservation). Any camper would have complete sympathy for you as this is not a proper way of doing business at all! I would never return and let others know not to bother making a reservation as that park doesn't abide by the commitment of fulfilling their end of a reservation. Thankfully this site does have this forum and you can post the issue and the park here to save us the hassle of supporting lame business owners from making money off us.
IMHO, once you made the reservation and deposit they should hold that site number for you regardless of any reason! There is no reason they should keep the deposit if you don't show up, but can call and cancel your reservation unless the owner sold the park or it burned down! Thanks for joining and thanks for the posting!



QUOTE(Cdntravelmom @ Jun 24 2014, 12:00 AM) [snapback]37022[/snapback]

I'm a new member to this site but I think it provides a tremendous benefit to RV'ers. I plan on trying to review many parks we stay at. A very unfortunate situation incensed me to sign up and start reviewing. My review was rejected as we never actually stayed at the park. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me as the reason was because the owner dumped our reservations. I booked 2 sites for 8 nights in Feb for late July, early August. I paid the deposits. Last week the owner said she couldn't take us any longer. She told me her daughter overbooked and she was now reviewing her bookings. She said it was better than turning us away upon arrival!
Although I never had the opportunity to view this park in person, I believe the treatment I received should be allowed to be viewed by others. If I had read a review where a park didn't honour a reservation made and paid for then I wouldn't count on them honouring mine either. I would book ours and another families vacation time somewhere else. Too risky IMO.
We are now left without reservations over a long weekend. I just think it should not have been rejected as it's helpful. My rejection email had no way to reply so I thought I'd try here.
As a side note I'm a top reviewer on a popular hotel review site and not here to blast one park. I have a camping trip planned this weekend and was planning on reviewing it also. Due to the 6 month time limit on reviews I haven't been able to post any other ones yet.