"Sratching Me Olde Head"

Hey guys & gals -

Not trying to cause a problem here and yet after a few years of RVing I am still trying to wrap my head around something. I realize that each of our wants and needs in an RV park/campground/resort, etc. are different and yet I still shake my head when I read reviews on a specific one and find the first several reviews to be all marked 2, 3, or maybe even as high as a 4, with the majority of complaints being about the very close spaces, the dirt pads, dust, no wifi, rude managers, loose dogs, filthy restrooms, etc., etc., etc. And then I read a following review from the same time period that opens with something like, "Oh my, what a wonderful place to stay" and then raving about how beautiful the grounds are, how quiet it is, how pleasant and helpful the managers were and how wonderful the showers and restrooms were. Again, I realize everyone is different but how can a park change so drastically for that one person. I doubt I am the only one scratching his head about this but maybe I am and just haven't been out there long enough to find out how this works? To reverse things, we've stayed at a few pretty "scuzzy" parks in our travels and reviewed them as such only to find the next reviewer raving about them in all areas including the filthy restrooms. It would be interesting to get a few other "reads" on why this seems to happen. And I know for almost certain someone is going to respond with, "Different strokes for different folks", so I am prepared for that one. Or how about, "Whatever trips one's trigger"............

Questioningly, BankShot...........(aka Terry)

 

The situation you describe exists on every review site regardless of the particular things being reviewed. Whether it's Yelp, Amazon or TripAdvisor the same phenomena exists.

IMHO there are two primary causes of such widely divergent reviews. One is as you have already noted--different strokes for different folks! Unfortunately, the other is less benign and it is falsified reviews by people with a vested interest in the CG, restaurant or product being reviewed.

We, the RVPR admins, work diligently to detect reviews submitted by park owners, friends, employees, but we have to err on the side of posting a review unless we have definite proof that it was submitted by someone who is violating our TOS. I personally have posted many reviews in which I was convinced that someone was shilling for the park's management, but, because I couldn't prove it, I had to post them.

 

What you say Joel is something I just didn't think of but you are correct. I should have realized that the fourth or fifth person giving a 9 or 10 rating to an obviously 1,2 or 3 park is a shill being used by the park. And to think there are people out there that would stoop that low. Boggles me old mind..... But then again it don't take much to boggle this old mind anymore.............

Happy Holidays, BankShot..........(aka Terry)

 

A few years ago TripAdvisor was sued, in Europe, by some hoteliers for the large percentage of fake reviews on its website. Amazon flags product reviews as "verified review" if its system knows the reviewer has purchased the item. It's a problem all over.

 

One other thing I've noted at times when there's a string of similar reviews followed by one or more contradictory reviews, is a fairly large date gap between the opposing views, sometimes as much as a couple of years. I always check the dates when there's that sort of disparity. An ownership or management change, for instance, can make a world of difference in a hurry, in either direction. Just something else to watch for when evaluating parks to visit...

 

One thing I look at is the person writing the review. Has that person written many reviews, and what are their other reviews like. Too often I find folks with just a couple of reviews written and read them as that person having a chip on their shoulder about one thing or another.

My question, are reviews looked into when they are marked as not helpful? I am sure they are, but are any ever actually removed?

 

The "not helpful " tag is something most of us think should be eliminated . What isn't helpful to one person might be very helpful to another . Furthermore , not everyone is comfortable writing full sentences of text .

At present nothing is done with reviews marked as not helpful and they definitely aren't removed.

 

Besides the possible "shills" mentioned before, I too thought about the experience of the reviewer, only with an opposite result. Picture the new RV'er, with a new unit stopping at the first campground they find. They are so overwhelmed with excitement With their new RV, that they overlook the obvious problems with the park. With their ignorance, they may believe the 1, 2, 3 rated park is the norm, and so rate it high, thinking all parks are like that. As they gain experience, their ratings might become more "consistant" with the rest of the reviewers.

I'll admit these examples are not too common, but might be an explanation for some of the unusual ratings.

Chris G.
F3508s

 

Always look at a user's other reviews - you can find a pattern of what they think. There was one that I looked through, and if they could connect to the park's wi-fi, they gave it a 10. If they couldn't, or even if a park didn't have wi-fi (and didn't advertise they did), they gave it a 1.

 

You have to remember too that each persons wants and needs differ. I often see places with good general maintenance and appearance downgraded by someone because of bad wifi or dogs or bathrooms, and everyone's opinion and desires differ. I do have to say that overall we have found that ratings on this site are typically very reliable, especially when there are several recent reviews. And if there is a difference among sites we use, we err on the site of RVPark Reviews. YMMV.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

...and then sometimes they do what I did - review the wrong park. (Don't worry, I had it fixed.)

 

In general, I'm one of those who rates more highly based on working wi-fi! But I try and look at each park in a totality. And be honest about facilities I didn't use or even look at. I think the major issue is shills, which numerically messes with the overall numbers, although it might not matter if you read the reviews, versus just look at the numbers. One other issue is that management can change - if you read a bunch of crappy reviews, then there's a new owner and it gets dramatically better (or the opposite, right?) - then the numbers will look skewed. It would help all of us if we know there's a new sheriff in town, that we mention that (good or bad.) That way, if we actually have a great time and review highly - it doesn't look like WE'RE the shill. Just sayin'.

 

It would also help if any slanted to giving ratings up or down based on ancillary issues state so in their review. We don't significantly change ratings based on wifi, restrooms etc. The overall camping, space, park layout and atmosphere means much more to us. But, I constantly see folks rating places up or down based on restrooms or showers.

This doesn't mean ones rating is more important than another's, but for them to be effective we do need a common starting point.


Alan

 

Regardless of what review sites you use, they all suffer from the fact that people rate things differently. There's no effective way to create a uniform approach no matter how many guidelines are posted. What is a go/no-go problem for one person isn't even a consideration for another.

That's why we always suggest to users that they read reviews thoroughly rather than relying on the numerical scores. It's not all that uncommon to find that a particularly poor review may have resulted from "issues" that aren't any of concern to you.

 

I think that the site took a big leap forward when a new process was put in place allowing a reviewer to input information and comments about Site and Campground Details. You see those below the comments box on a review. If you go back to reviews some years back, that feature was not in place. Also in that area is a separate star system for Value, Service, Cleanliness. But then all of that requires the reviewer take the time to do it when writing a review in order for it to be helpful to others.

While the star rating system and the colored horizontal bars in the Ratings Overview is helpful, Reviewer comments about a particularly good or bad part of the facilities and amenities is way more helpful to me. That would include the things like WiFi, bathrooms, pet areas, properly functioning utilities, etc.

But once again that requires that the reviewer take the time to make it helpful for others.

docj said that the RVPR admins, work diligently to detect reviews submitted that are what someone else in the thread called "shills". Has anyone else noticed that the negative reviews at least contain some valuable information about the CG, as opposed to a complete rant/rave from someone who writes a review based on an "it's all about me" attitude? I suspect that process is looked at closely, as well.

 

I am new to this forum but have been very active on Trip Advisor and have been a destination expert for them for many years with around 17,000 posts and 200 reviews.
We have had similar problems with review on TA as well. As a rule of thumb someone with 1 or 2 reviews and almost no forum posts and their reviews seem to be vastly different (either good or bad) from the majority (especially those with multiple reviews), I ignore these reviews. Also we have had many hotels “plant” fake reviews or “give gifts to patrons” to post positive reviews. These hotels have been dealt with, sometimes severely, with loss of status or even loss of listing.
It is a problem I am sure on almost all travel type forums. You just have to be smart and weed out the riff-raff when you read the reviews.
momdoc

 

Agree with most of the posts, it all comes down to "different strokes for different folks". (A term that younger generation may not be familiar with!) I tend to rate a campground on the "high" side, unless it truly warranted a very low rating. Very few in our travels, were true dumps, and if you take the time to address the entire campground experience not just WiFi or bathrooms, you can normally find decent things about them.
Of course, there are exceptions!

 

I also agree if a dirty bathroom or a broken shower and such is the worst you encounter you should just mention that in your review and not ding the entire campground if the rest is ok or many times even better than ok.

momdoc