When completing a review, we're given options to "grade" a campground using a scale of 1 to 10. However, when you look at the words that describe the score, we only get 5 choices: Excellent, Good, Average, Poor, and Terrible (each gets two score choices). I recommend: 10=Fabulous, 9=Excellent, 8=Upscale, 7=Good, 6=Nice, 5=Acceptable, 4=Weak, 3=Poor, 2=Dismal, and 1=Terrible. I place my score at the end of my reviews and have a grading process (looking at amenities, site spacing, "health" of the CG, management's attention-to-detail, and similar items). For example, a "Nice" CG has a pool while a "Good" CG has a heated pool or maybe a hottub/Spa. If the CG has a usable fitness center, it gets an "Upscale" grade. Wide, asphalt roads with wide pads of hand-laid, mosaic bricks will get a 9=Excellent. Toss in an on-site cafe and get 10=Fabulous. It gives us more flexibility. How 'bout it?
Using a scale that offers ten points instead of five might give a reader/writer a little more latitude but in the end a high score is still a high score no matter what. People do use different criteria in how they will grade a park. I found myself pretty disappointed when I first began using this site. I just looked for high scores and upon arrival found that I was not pleased with the park at all. I couldn't understand where I went wrong. Was I that much different that these other folks? Nope. I just learned not to look for Classic Rock in the Rap section. The way you grade is similar to what I use except for amenities, I will look to see what amenities are listed but I am more interested to see if what is offered is delivered. That is why I read the reviews rather than rely on numbers. Someone elses one could mean a ten to me and vise versa. If a park delivers what they advertise then they get a high mark. If that means an Ocean view with a table and a fire pit for a fair price and that is what I got, then I give a high score. Darrell
It's all subjective - everybody has different ideas of what is important. Everywhere I go has some kind of water (ocean, lake, river), so a pool isn't important to me. If I was to rate a place because of their pool, a heated pool is not important to me - I prefer a cool dip, and my experience with heated pools is that they intensify the chlorine smell. To get a good feel, you have to read the reviews, not just the scores. I saw someone that would give a park a 10 if it had good wifi, and a 1 if it didn't - even a state park that didn't have wifi at all.
Like it or not, I'm pretty sure that most people base their scores on those aspects of a park that matter most to them. For example, if you're like us, seniors traveling without children or pets, don't expect my reviews to reflect the quality of the playground or the dog run. Similarly, many RVers with self- contained toilet and showers never set foot inside those provided by the CG. That may not produce the most uniform review content, but it does reflect reality.
