Expectations at RV Parks - Do you adapt?

[bigdogger]

I was reading the bad reviews on rvparkreviews.com today and was struck by how some people apparently are unwilling or unable to adjust their expectations based on special circumstances.
On person gave a park the lowest possible score because of guests making noise. Understandable, until you realize they were staying at a park adjacent to Churchill Downs during the Kentucky Derby. The reviewer even said they were there because of the race. Surely most people would understand that the Derby is the biggest party in Kentucky and no one would expect normal quiet hours to prevail that weekend, but not that reviewer.
A second reviewer was upset that the park they were staying in told them they should disconnect their hoses at night due to freezing temperatures. I would consider that to be good advice and welcome news, not these people. The park also unhooked their washing machines in the evening (the reviewer said they were outside) again a prudent move if a freeze was expected. Didn't make a difference to the reviewer, to them freezing temperatures and precautions to make sure damage didn't occur results in the lowest possible score.
I try to put things into perspective and rate accordingly. What do you do?

[Skid_Row_Joe]

docj wrote:
I pretty much agree with you, but the comment "the park is full of long term tenants" I think is a pejorative remark that is often unfair and out of touch with the realities of life in the US these days.

As full-timers my DW and I like to travel and have found that the percentage of RV parks with "long term tenants" is well over 50% and includes major chains such as KOA that have, in the past, almost exclusively appealed to families on vacation.

For a variety of reasons there are lots of people living on a long term basis in RV parks and I, for one, don't have any problem with that as long as the appearance of the park doesn't suffer because of it. Many of these folks are in towns on temporary jobs and prefer to living in their RVs rather than in hotels or short-term apartments. Even my DW and I could be considered long term tenants at the park where we winter for 4-5 months. Do we make that park less desirable because of our presence?

As an admin of RVParkReviews, I feel that the derogatory use of "long term residents" and similar terms is unwarranted in many of the cases in which it is used. If the park looks "seedy" because of its long term residents, then you have every right to comment on that, but it's not at all clear why the very presence of long term residents, like ourselves, for example makes a park a less desirable place.

Joel

If long-term residents were a plus, it would not be mentioned as a degrading earmark. I get the creeps when arriving at my designated site when I see any long term, unkempt and crappy sites at any RV park. I always mention these eyesores and in my mind security risks, when evaluating any RV park for your site. It downgrades an RV park with any of them.

[noe-place]

I wouldn't expect perfection in a site unless I owned the campground myself. Even then I'd probably find something I didn't like.

[FunnyCamper]

sure I adjust.

isn't that what life is about? adjusting and finding the good in all situations? We do. We have fun whatever we do, whatever the circumstances etc.
life is too short.

in all our 15+ yrs camping I can count on 1 hand the times we got annoyed. annoyed, not over the top 🙂

[MiRV]

docj wrote:


I pretty much agree with you, but the comment "the park is full of long term tenants" I think is a pejorative remark that is often unfair and out of touch with the realities of life in the US these days.

As full-timers my DW and I like to travel and have found that the percentage of RV parks with "long term tenants" is well over 50% and includes major chains such as KOA that have, in the past, almost exclusively appealed to families on vacation.

For a variety of reasons there are lots of people living on a long term basis in RV parks and I, for one, don't have any problem with that as long as the appearance of the park doesn't suffer because of it. Many of these folks are in towns on temporary jobs and prefer to living in their RVs rather than in hotels or short-term apartments. Even my DW and I could be considered long term tenants at the park where we winter for 4-5 months. Do we make that park less desirable because of our presence?

As an admin of RVParkReviews, I feel that the derogatory use of "long term residents" and similar terms is unwarranted in many of the cases in which it is used. If the park looks "seedy" because of its long term residents, then you have every right to comment on that, but it's not at all clear why the very presence of long term residents, like ourselves, for example makes a park a less desirable place.

Joel

Docj,

Agree completely! It's not the Long Termers who make it undesirable since many of them are a wealth of knowledge for the area. And "wintering" is very different than spending YEARS in one CG! We just left a park (Charleston SC area) where an individual had been at the park for 5+ years!

If you want to live in the area, buy a house or park your "camper" in an mobile home park so that RVers have a place to stay!

[MiRV]

With respect to the Kentucky Derby, it's like going to a NASCAR race…you expect to have noise and partying!

However, we adapt (maybe too much) at normal CGs. I am a little disappointed with CGs that have "rules" but don't enforce them! (i.e. dogs on leashes, noise, smoking around the bathhouse, etc.) In most CGs, it's a wild wild west show! I've seen too many campers who don't think the rules apply!

[spoon059]

Some people are funny. I tend to read reviews and pick and choose what information is important to me. Funny story for me... years ago my parents had a class c they were about to sell. My wife had never camped before, figured we would go to Disney over the holidays and test out camping in an RV.

We stayed at a nice park just outside Disney. New Years Eve we went to the 9:30 PM fireworks, then came back and went to bed like a couple of old folks (I was 25, bride was 23!!!) Around midnight the noise makers and fireworks went off. We woke up and were so mad... then we started laughing about how pathetic we were! On vacation, young, married just over a year... and complaining about loud noise on New Years! We still laugh about it to this day.

I wouldn't fault the RV park... they didn't throw the party. How do you expect the 1 or 2 camp hosts to quell an entire park full of people celebrating an event like that? Its unreasonable. The park didn't post a notice of rule waiver for that night... it was just kinda something you would expect.

If you go to New Orleans during Mardis Gras, you should expect a little noise almost 24 hours a day almost anywhere in the city...

Some people complain about things that I wouldn't even consider complaining about. Its one thing to mention it in passing... its another to rip a park apart because of something. Hershey Highmeadows Park in Hershey PA is known for being in close proximity to a train track. Some people moan and complain about that park like its going to ruin your credit and steal your car. I've stayed there before... knew about the train and turned my fan on to drown out the noise. Never heard the thing the entire time.

[Mr_Mark1]

docj wrote:

Mr.Mark wrote:
docj, I agree with you and didn't mean to put down 'long term tenants' as being undesirable. But, in most of the parks where this is allowed, it's not been all that pretty. If the park owners would make sure that the 'long term tenants' followed the rules then this subject would be moot. But, they don't for some reason.

During the winter months that we are long term tenants, I sure hope that people don't think my US flag, our garden flags, my DW's geraniums, our 2 lawn chairs and small table, and the folded up ladder under my MH are trashy! We also have tire covers, as well as windshield and mirror covers. This makes us look very settled, but I would hate to think that others consider this an eyesore! :R

Unfortunately, I think that some people would consider this to be "clutter"; some reviews I've read of parks we have stayed at were critical of things we thought were just fine.

The bottom line for us is that I pay no attention to such comments in reviews unless the reviewer provides specific information as to what he is objecting to. The very existence of long term residents doesn't tell me anything.

Docj, you know that is not what I'm talking about (your set-up). In fact, you are not a real full-timer tenant if you move every 5-6 months. I'm talking about the 3 and 4 YEAR long term tenants or longer.

Your set-up sounds just fine as that's what we look like.

When you have an RV park with people that generally stay less than a week or even people who stay a season, we are talking about the same type of RVer. When you go to a park with very long term tenants, its the clashing of two totally different worlds.

This is not to put down anybody but people who can afford to fill up their diesel pushers with $700 worth of fuel every couple of weeks is not on the same plain as a person who lives in a tailer park/KOA. Some of the long term tenants do look pretty bad (just person observation).

I prefer a regular RV park whether they are pulling a travel trailer, fifth wheel or gas class A or diesel pusher. So, that's what I look for when reading the reviews.

Safe travels,
MM.

[Skid_Row_Joe]

bigdogger wrote:
I was reading the bad reviews on rvparkreviews.com today and was struck by how some people apparently are unwilling or unable to adjust their expectations based on special circumstances.
On person gave a park the lowest possible score because of guests making noise. Understandable, until you realize they were staying at a park adjacent to Churchill Downs during the Kentucky Derby. The reviewer even said they were there because of the race. Surely most people would understand that the Derby is the biggest party in Kentucky and no one would expect normal quiet hours to prevail that weekend, but not that reviewer.
A second reviewer was upset that the park they were staying in told them they should disconnect their hoses at night due to freezing temperatures. I would consider that to be good advice and welcome news, not these people. The park also unhooked their washing machines in the evening (the reviewer said they were outside) again a prudent move if a freeze was expected. Didn't make a difference to the reviewer, to them freezing temperatures and precautions to make sure damage didn't occur results in the lowest possible score.
I try to put things into perspective and rate accordingly. What do you do?

Not take their advise.:W

[TechWriter]

bigred1cav wrote:
All I want is a secure place, no music, no drunks, no nascar, no barking dogs. The pool not interested in others soaked off body cells.

Don't care if people happen to step,on my spot passing by. Clean water, good electric service and sewer hookup. Playgrounds not of interest, clean reasonable laundry is of interest.

This is a pretty big list, comrade.

Music (usually load music on weekends) is pretty much a given + barking dogs. I carry a surge guard and an auto former because I don't count on campground electric.

Good luck with your search.

[docj]

Mr.Mark wrote:
docj, I agree with you and didn't mean to put down 'long term tenants' as being undesirable. But, in most of the parks where this is allowed, it's not been all that pretty. If the park owners would make sure that the 'long term tenants' followed the rules then this subject would be moot. But, they don't for some reason.

During the winter months that we are long term tenants, I sure hope that people don't think my US flag, our garden flags, my DW's geraniums, our 2 lawn chairs and small table, and the folded up ladder under my MH are trashy! We also have tire covers, as well as windshield and mirror covers. This makes us look very settled, but I would hate to think that others consider this an eyesore! :R

Unfortunately, I think that some people would consider this to be "clutter"; some reviews I've read of parks we have stayed at were critical of things we thought were just fine.

The bottom line for us is that I pay no attention to such comments in reviews unless the reviewer provides specific information as to what he is objecting to. The very existence of long term residents doesn't tell me anything.

[bigred1cav]

All I want is a secure place, no music, no drunks, no nascar, no barking dogs. The pool not interested in others soaked off body cells.

Don't care if people happen to step,on my spot passing by. Clean water, good electric service and sewer hookup. Playgrounds not of interest, clean reasonable laundry is of interest.

[Mr_Mark1]

docj, I agree with you and didn't mean to put down 'long term tenants' as being undesirable. But, in most of the parks where this is allowed, it's not been all that pretty. If the park owners would make sure that the 'long term tenants' followed the rules then this subject would be moot. But, they don't for some reason.

That was one thing I mentioned on a KOA evaluation... why do they allow long term tenants? The KOA's that we go to, which is fairly often for one night stays, some allow it. The one's that don't look much better. It's just something I've noticed while traveling over the last 7 yrs. and 65,000 miles.

MM.

[docj]

Pogoil wrote:
We have been traveling by RV for almost 25 years. We have stayed in many parks but do not understand the need to post reviews. We do however check the area we are in and read reviews as entertainment. Mostly the parks rated as a 1 because it rained. Also use the Good Sam book as we choose not to have a smart phone glued to our hands.

If you are using the Good Sam book then you are reading reviews, just not the ones posted on review sites. If the Good Sam rating system works for you as a way of finding a place to stay, that's great.

However, many of us are interested in more narrative detail than is available in the Good Sam guide so we rely on the reviews of others. Yes, there are stupid reviews (a "1" because it rained) but out of >200k reviews on RVParkReviews I think there are many good ones. Furthermore, I am far less interested in a park's numerical score than in the descriptive aspects of the review.

As for posting reviews for others to read, I think an important aspect of social media is being a full participant and not someone who just lurks and takes information provided by others. We rely on TripAdvisor, Yelp and RVParkReviews heavily in our travels and are active participants on all of them. JMO and I'm not in any way asking you to change the way you travel, just explaining why others choose to do something you don't feel is important.

[docj]

Mr.Mark wrote:
Docj, thanks for chiming in, it's nice to know who is doing the editing/observing.

I certainly do read RVparkreviews.com to check on parks that we are not familiar with. As others do, we try and read between the lines. Several things usually get my attention when they say:

- the park is full of long term tenants (has never proven to be a plus).
- low hanging branches, narrow roads (I really don't want to scratch the coach).
- rude staff (especially if it's a constant remark).

I pretty much agree with you, but the comment "the park is full of long term tenants" I think is a pejorative remark that is often unfair and out of touch with the realities of life in the US these days.

As full-timers my DW and I like to travel and have found that the percentage of RV parks with "long term tenants" is well over 50% and includes major chains such as KOA that have, in the past, almost exclusively appealed to families on vacation.

For a variety of reasons there are lots of people living on a long term basis in RV parks and I, for one, don't have any problem with that as long as the appearance of the park doesn't suffer because of it. Many of these folks are in towns on temporary jobs and prefer to living in their RVs rather than in hotels or short-term apartments. Even my DW and I could be considered long term tenants at the park where we winter for 4-5 months. Do we make that park less desirable because of our presence?

As an admin of RVParkReviews, I feel that the derogatory use of "long term residents" and similar terms is unwarranted in many of the cases in which it is used. If the park looks "seedy" because of its long term residents, then you have every right to comment on that, but it's not at all clear why the very presence of long term residents, like ourselves, for example makes a park a less desirable place.

Joel

[Pogoil]

We have been traveling by RV for almost 25 years. We have stayed in many parks but do not understand the need to post reviews. We do however check the area we are in and read reviews as entertainment. Mostly the parks rated as a 1 because it rained. Also use the Good Sam book as we choose not to have a smart phone glued to our hands.

That being said we have never stayed in a park that was so bad we would not return if it was convenient to do so.

We have always enjoyed the park for what it was. We are not resort type people. Many that travel should just stay home based on the reviews I often read on RV Park Reviews.

Pogoil.