Paying for two sites

PRodacy wrote:

Crowe wrote:
It's all about "me", isn't it?

Wasting your breath. These people don't see themselves that way.

Good analogy Larry. If you want to have two campsites or an oversize steak and you can pay for it then it is your right to do that.

Not even close to a good analogy. You need to take a class in Economics 101 and learn the laws of supply and demand. Someone eating the 16 ounce steak doesn't take a steak away from someone wanting an 8 ounce steak because the restaurant has adequate supply of both. Not so in a campground. It's obvious some of you will do whatever it takes to try and justify your selfishness. Your mamas would be embarrassed. Makes me miss camping a lot less-I've had far less issues in hot els than I've had in campgrounds.

Have to agree with Larry. Crowe, by your way of thinking, everyone should also get rid of their big rigs and use small trailers ( maybe a teardrop trailer) so that more people would fit in a campground. Having a MH or 5er takes up more room than you need and denies others camping spots. That's just being selfish!

I would use the restaurant analogy of reserving all the tables around you and when someone comes in to find a table, the host says, "sorry, no room".

This is quickly turning into a 1% vs. 99% discussion. No one has a right to a campsite. If you wake up Friday morning and decide to go to a campground for the weekend, there's no reason to expect that there will be one there waiting for you. There's no difference between someone renting 2 sites and using one and someone renting a site for the summer, dumping a trailer on it and only occupying it on a few weekends.

I understand the OP's issue because he/she is from the northeast where personal space is for some reason sacred. An example: The riders on the commuter rail into Boston have been complaining that there aren't enough cars on trains because the people getting on at the last few stops have to stand. Meanwhile, the middle seats in the 3-seat rows go unoccupied or someone has their jacket/laptop/briefcase/purse on it.

When I read the first few posts, I knew this would be a contentious thread. Oddly, the thread with suggestions on what to put on your site's picnic table to discourage neighbors got a good chuckle from everyone. The purpose of both threads was the same.

Crowe wrote:
It's all about "me", isn't it?

Wasting your breath. These people don't see themselves that way.

Good analogy Larry. If you want to have two campsites or an oversize steak and you can pay for it then it is your right to do that.

Not even close to a good analogy. You need to take a class in Economics 101 and learn the laws of supply and demand. Someone eating the 16 ounce steak doesn't take a steak away from someone wanting an 8 ounce steak because the restaurant has adequate supply of both. Not so in a campground. It's obvious some of you will do whatever it takes to try and justify your selfishness. Your mamas would be embarrassed. Makes me miss camping a lot less-I've had far less issues in hot els than I've had in campgrounds.

Have to agree with Larry. Crowe, by your way of thinking, everyone should also get rid of their big rigs and use small trailers ( maybe a teardrop trailer) so that more people would fit in a campground. Having a MH or 5er takes up more room than you need and denies others camping spots. That's just being selfish!

It's all about "me", isn't it?

Wasting your breath. These people don't see themselves that way.

Good analogy Larry. If you want to have two campsites or an oversize steak and you can pay for it then it is your right to do that.

Not even close to a good analogy. You need to take a class in Economics 101 and learn the laws of supply and demand. Someone eating the 16 ounce steak doesn't take a steak away from someone wanting an 8 ounce steak because the restaurant has adequate supply of both. Not so in a campground. It's obvious some of you will do whatever it takes to try and justify your selfishness. Your mamas would be embarrassed. Makes me miss camping a lot less-I've had far less issues in hotels than I've had in campgrounds.

westernrvparkowner wrote:
If it is primarily on the weekends you plan to do this, you can probably reserve it and after Friday night cancel the remainder of that reservation and get yourself a refund as well as be reasonably sure the site will remain vacant. That way you could reserve and keep vacant sites on both sides of you and only end up paying the cost of one extra vacant site. Just a suggestion.

It's all about "me", isn't it?

VT Skier wrote:
Has anyone ever paid for two sites so they would be assured of some privacy or more room? At our favorite CG some of non electric sites are a bit close together so we will pay for two sites just wondering if anyone else does this.

We've stayed at state parks in PA, NY, MD, and VA in the past few years and every one of them specifically state the minimum number of occupants as 1. If VT state parks allow this I am surprised as well as disheartened because if it can be done under the rules, then all sorts of "all about me" folks will certainly do it.

VT Skier wrote:
Has anyone ever paid for two sites so they would be assured of some privacy or more room? At our favorite CG some of non electric sites are a bit close together so we will pay for two sites just wondering if anyone else does this.

No.
Just because a person has the money to rent the whole campground or several sites doesn't give him the right to keep others from enjoying their camp experiences.

I believe you should be able to pay for all the sites you want.

I also believe the campground should be able to fill any unoccupied sites when needed. Airlines and hotels routinely overbook to maximize occupancy and profits. I can see it working for campgrounds too. It would suck for the guy who showed up late with a paid reservation at a busy time though...

LarryJM wrote:

Crowe wrote:
RUDE ... that's too funny. A person is paying for two sites and who are you to say how they use them.

Oh, I don't care HOW they use them. It's just unfair-and rude-to deny someone else the ability to camp because of your selfishness and arrogance. There's a simple concept called SHARING. Campgrounds are a shared resource. Accept it or boondock. There's another simple concept called RESPECT. Respect another's right to be in that campground if they so desire without you being greedy. Again, I will reiterate if the campground isn't busy when you get there, then ask, but to hog campsites because you feel you are more privileged than others is the epitome of the "it's all about me" mindset, the mindset that so many of you condemn as long as it pertains to someone else.

Again TOO FUNNY ... Concept of Sharing ... So if you buy a steak in a restaurant you are obligated to SHARE THAT and not be greedy or selfish and eat it all yourself. SHAME ON YOU FOR PURCHASING THAT 16oz steak instead of an 8 oz since you are being greedy and might be preventing someone else from purchasing that 16oz steak. You don't seem to understand that when you pay for something it is then YOUR RIGHT under the terms of that payment to use it within the rules if any and being selfish or greedy has absolutely nothing to do with it and any argument to the contrary is just a red herring IMO.

Larry

Good analogy Larry. If you want to have two campsites or an oversize steak and you can pay for it then it is your right to do that.

He is trolling...we are biting.


Gary Haupt