RV Park Review deferred

Thanks, Joel and/or Sandi (DocJ), for helping to clear things up a bit.

For the record though, count me amongst those who DO want to know if a park has recently been purchased by a Medical Marijuana Support Group. If posts are deferred for that, please reconsider.

And I DO want to know if a park does not honor its verbal commitment for an assigned site and the reason for same.

If it was a case of a very desirable site being "reserved" for a pop-up and a person
with a 45' motorhome came in and could only fit/level there, then that might be something
to consider. Facts, please!

Whether or not your have a child at a nearby college and/or your desire to not upset the owners
by complaining, though? Please leave that out as "too personal".

If the OP wants a third party opinion of his review, send it to me at redshift33@yahoo.com. I will review and edit it for you in such a manner that it will not be rejected. I have submitted numerous reviews, both positive and negative, and never had a problem with being rejected.

Deb and Ed M wrote:
We went there for a family gathering, so had a bunch of kids from toddlers-to-teens. Since they had booths set up with "samples" - we just told the kids to stay in our site and NOT eat/drink anything that WE didn't prepare....LOL!

Mentioning these facts (the booths with "samples") would have been better that mentioning that the CG was now owned by a "Medical Marijuana Support Group" and been far more informative.

Deb and Ed M wrote:
I was told by some lovely girls who apparently attended the camp weekly, that the new water heater had "been there for weeks, but nobody had installed it yet". IMO, that shows a general lack of maintenance - not simply a bad weekend.

Although second hand information this would have also helped with your complaint about the hot water. Although I suspect the previous change would have been enough. :D

Deb and Ed M wrote:
So anyone who reads the former RV Park Reviews about this place, will be expecting a wholesome, family-friendly experience that caters to church or family groups. Boy, will THEY be surprised.

An extremely good point. I would encourage you to change your review and get it published for just this reason. I know it's something I would certainly want to know prior to making (or not making in this case ;) ) reservations.

suprz wrote:
I have posted on RV park reviews and BLASTED a bad park and didn't have any issues, but that was in. 2010.... At least they haven't deleted it. I just checked.and it is still up there

There are thousands of negative reviews among the more than >200k reviews on the site. There is a widely circulated "internet myth" that negative reviews won't be posted. There is no truth to it. We have many reviews of the form:

"This is a terrible RV park and we will never stay here again. The restrooms are old and dirty. The sites are narrow and aren't level. The roads are gravel and have huge potholes. This place is a dump for the price they charge."

We have absolutely no problems with such reviews. The only reviews that get returned to the writers with request for revision are those that take the entirety of the review to complain about a single issue such as the fact that the reviewer didn't get the site he had reserved. Such reviews aren't rejected; they are returned and the writer is asked to revise them by providing some information about the park that would be helpful to others who didn't encounter the reservation problems that person had had. The complaint can still be part of the review, but we ask that other information be provided, in addition.

This, by no means, requires you to write a "nice" review about the park. You are welcome to write that in addition to having, for example, the problem with your site you found the park to be "old, dirty, with potholed roads and low water pressure." As long as what you write is truthful, you can add as many negative items as you wish.

Lauren wrote:
This was in 2012 and as posted - you should seen my original! We still laugh though when he threatened my 107# wife (that he was 2 1/2 the size of)) and she just looked him right in the eye and said, "Just try it!" I think that got applause from those standing around. We were not breaking any rules or causing any kind of disturbance....we just left the gate open as a courtesy and, although not posted or told, he has a rule against that. About a year before that the company our son works for was asked to do some work there and, after meeting the guy, refused to enter into a contract.

This was the part I guess I took out or something.

Anyhow, here is what got in.

" I strongly recommend you avoid this park. The owner is out of control with his attitude, his mouth and his rules. And you better listen up, know them (whether told or not) and obey them. He has a reputation is known amongst those staying there and in the area. The Wi-Fi consists of a modem / router in the office which is rarely functional and owner does not feel he owes its working properly to anyone. He said so. But the park is clean and kept up. Keep in mind, as the owner well knows, he is - by far - the "only show in town' (or at least the only FHU place) for many miles around. So he will tell you to go someplace else if you don't like it or if he wants people to leave. "

This is still a pretty negative review and I'm sure that anyone reading it will try hard to find a different RV park. I think your message gets across quite clearly.

joe b. wrote:
If you make any despairing remarks about the owners or management of a park, it will not be posted. We went through this a few months back with one of the rvparkreviews administrators/censors, person. You are only allowed to describe the park. But most of us seem to understand that the best park in existence can be ruined by bad management. Also keep in mind that the rvparkreviews is owned by a private company and they make their money by selling ads on the site.

With all due respect there is absolutely no truth to your statement. Reviews can be negative and, believe me, there are plenty of them if you take the time to look.

All we ask is that your review provide some information about the park in addition to recounting your bad experience. There is nothing wrong with saying that the manager is over his head or is simply a jerk. But since you did stay there for some number of days you might want to add something like "despite the fact that the management were all creeps, the place was pretty clean and the dog run was large." You might be surprised, but that would probably turn it into an acceptable review.

You are absolutely correct.

I did get an email and I did re-write it. I freely admit I did overstep some - but did not fully realize it when I did the original.

I have no beef with RVParkReviews at all. I use it and recommend it all the time.

I should have stated what you said here and I apologize for now doing so.

Lauren wrote:
I posted one once about a park near St. Paul, MN and it was not approved. Of my over 100 posts this was the first one that ever was not. But I told the truth about the owner's behavior daily after about 3-4pm and the issues it cost us and others in the park. I guess they felt that was too personal or something.

If your review was deferred you would have received an email telling you the reasons for the deferral and providing you the option of rewriting it. If you did not receive such an email it may be because it went to your SPAM folder or because you no longer use the email account under which you registered your membership on RVParkReviews.

GMandJM wrote:

dieharder wrote:
"Personal Information" does not necessarily have to be about people in the park, but information that can be used to trace back who YOU are.

For example, if you said you reserved site XXX and yadda, yadda, yadda, since you've giving the month/year of your stay, the park can track back who you are using those specifics. They don't want their site used for fingerpointing at anybody, just for reviews of the park. Like said previously, copy and paste the problem review for accurate replies.

Are you certain this is correct? I generally do include site numbers in my reviews.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with providing specific site information in reviews. People do it all the time in situations such as these:

"Satellite TV access is good in sites 29-32"

"Sites 40-50 are fairly level; the rest of the park is not"

bigdogger wrote:


Saying that the park was bought by "Medical Marijuana Support Group" does enter a gray area. Where would you draw the line? If the park was bought by a gay couple would that be appropriate to comment on? What if the owners were Jewish, or Asian, OK to say your rating of the park was influenced by their religion or ethnicity? There are causes I support, and that information is not material my business.
As for the cold shower, that may or may not be material to review. If the water heater was truly being replaced, the fact that there was no hot water is probably just a one off bout of bad luck and really shouldn't be reported as a problem. Just like it wouldn't be fair to say the power at a park didn't work at all, when in fact the power outage was caused by a downed power line and the power was restored when the line was fixed.
As for the Canoe livery/ maintaining the river part of your post, I don't understand it at all. Didn't know that any business had the obligation, ability or even the legal authority to maintain a river. And I sure feel that anytime you put any boat on any body of water, there is going to be some risks of injury.

In Michigan, the DNR requires liveries to "maintain" the river stretches they use - to make sure any downed trees are cut back to offer safe passage. We portaged 6 times in 5 miles on their "beginner" stretch.

I understand what you are saying - and in my review I tried very hard to NOT sound "biased". I don't really care what or who the management is, as long as they offer a family-friendly and safe camping experience. OR - if they'd at least have mentioned the change in "direction" the camp was taking. We went there for a family gathering, so had a bunch of kids from toddlers-to-teens. Since they had booths set up with "samples" - we just told the kids to stay in our site and NOT eat/drink anything that WE didn't prepare....LOL!

I was told by some lovely girls who apparently attended the camp weekly, that the new water heater had "been there for weeks, but nobody had installed it yet". IMO, that shows a general lack of maintenance - not simply a bad weekend.

So anyone who reads the former RV Park Reviews about this place, will be expecting a wholesome, family-friendly experience that caters to church or family groups. Boy, will THEY be surprised.