Jim Shoe wrote:
As previously mentioned, RV Park Reviews allows campers that stayed there to review the parks. But if you look at several of them, you'll find that the low marks and the high marks are often based on things out of the CG owner's control, nor are there any definitions of what's a 10 and what's a 1. I've seen CGs get a 1 from somebody because they allow golfcarts and others that give the same CG a 10 because they allow those same golfcarts.
+1. I've seen 1/10 ratings for some of the most petty or weird things imaginable. For example, faulting the RV park because there are train tracks nearby, while other people mention that the park has excellent Wi-Fi, bath houses, top tier hookups, 24 hour services, etc.
To help counteract that, I try to post a review for every place I go to, and edit it if something changes. For example, one place has two sections separated by a pond. One section has good wi-fi, but is fairly near a road. Past the pond, it is quiet (except for the bullfrog mating calls), but one has to use their own cellular items. People downvote the RV park because of the lack of Wi-Fi in the back section, and I like being able to clear that up. Wi-Fi is VERY expensive to do right, and unless a CG doubles their rates, people should be lucky to get any signal at all.
