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?

[Mr_Mark1]

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 skipped a couple of RV parks on the outskirts of Los Angeles just from the bad reviews and just kept on driving east to Palm Springs. I don't want to stay at a place that people felt unsafe in.

I have also posted about RV parks over the years. Generally, I don't think its much to want a level spot or trees not planted at the very edge of a pull-through site.

I would like to see a park owner ride on top of a class-A (safely of course) and trim the darn branches back. I don't want to damage an air conditioner or my satellite dome!

MM.

[lbrjet]

What do I do? I don't write a review and also don't read them. Any campground is a gamble with noise. It is all part of the experience, good or bad, which in my case has been about 90% good. Are the bathrooms clean? Don't care because I don't use them. Give me power, water and a sewer hookup and I'm good to go.

[et2]

bigdogger wrote:

docj wrote:

tsetsaf wrote:

2oldman wrote:
As for the reviews, they're silly, but, the bigger problem is that they're not monitored.

Amazon has a good policy where the makers of products actually read reviews, and respond to them. That keeps the internet trolls at bay.

Amazon products are a leader in fake reviews. It is a really big problem there. For the reasons expressed by the OP I have jumped in to www.campgroundviews.com submitting pictures, videos and reviews. We got burned too many times trying to interpret reviews on rvparkreviews plus we found out how many parks they are missing. I have one of those smart phones so it takes five minutes to shoot some vid and pics then send them over.

The new software platform that RVParkReviews is being migrated to will permit users to submit pictures along with their reviews.

It's also my understanding that the new database will include all parks, even those that haven't been reviewed.

Since a picture is worth 1000 words, have those pictures is going to make it real easy for those with less than honorable intentions to really skew up a park's ratings. Take a photo of garbage dump in Anytown USA and post it as the definitive proof a park is the pits. Or, take some photos of Amen Corner the next time you play Augusta National and you can use it as proof the park you wish to promote has great landscaping. Too lazy to actually go out and get those pictures? Photoshop in whatever you like from the comfort of your own living room. Bet the first time a park gets a review with a false picture you are really going to get some pushback. An opinion is just that, an opinion, but a photo is concrete proof and if someone starts posting manipulated photos, an aggrieved party may actually have grounds for a legal claim.
As for having "all" parks listed, that will only be as accurate as the database you draw the list from.

So what "you" are saying is all campground reviews on the net are useless, and any attempts to make them better are a act of futility, as there is nothing but dishonest people writing the reviews and the rest of us are to stupid to weed through the BS posts, and rules are meant to be broken? :h

[bigdogger]

docj wrote:

tsetsaf wrote:

2oldman wrote:
As for the reviews, they're silly, but, the bigger problem is that they're not monitored.

Amazon has a good policy where the makers of products actually read reviews, and respond to them. That keeps the internet trolls at bay.

Amazon products are a leader in fake reviews. It is a really big problem there. For the reasons expressed by the OP I have jumped in to www.campgroundviews.com submitting pictures, videos and reviews. We got burned too many times trying to interpret reviews on rvparkreviews plus we found out how many parks they are missing. I have one of those smart phones so it takes five minutes to shoot some vid and pics then send them over.

The new software platform that RVParkReviews is being migrated to will permit users to submit pictures along with their reviews.

It's also my understanding that the new database will include all parks, even those that haven't been reviewed.

Since a picture is worth 1000 words, have those pictures is going to make it real easy for those with less than honorable intentions to really skew up a park's ratings. Take a photo of garbage dump in Anytown USA and post it as the definitive proof a park is the pits. Or, take some photos of Amen Corner the next time you play Augusta National and you can use it as proof the park you wish to promote has great landscaping. Too lazy to actually go out and get those pictures? Photoshop in whatever you like from the comfort of your own living room. Bet the first time a park gets a review with a false picture you are really going to get some pushback. An opinion is just that, an opinion, but a photo is concrete proof and if someone starts posting manipulated photos, an aggrieved party may actually have grounds for a legal claim.
As for having "all" parks listed, that will only be as accurate as the database you draw the list from.

[docj]

tsetsaf wrote:

2oldman wrote:
As for the reviews, they're silly, but, the bigger problem is that they're not monitored.

Amazon has a good policy where the makers of products actually read reviews, and respond to them. That keeps the internet trolls at bay.

Amazon products are a leader in fake reviews. It is a really big problem there. For the reasons expressed by the OP I have jumped in to www.campgroundviews.com submitting pictures, videos and reviews. We got burned too many times trying to interpret reviews on rvparkreviews plus we found out how many parks they are missing. I have one of those smart phones so it takes five minutes to shoot some vid and pics then send them over.

The new software platform that RVParkReviews is being migrated to will permit users to submit pictures along with their reviews.

It's also my understanding that the new database will include all parks, even those that haven't been reviewed.

[docj]

John S. wrote:
It was also sold and now is corporately owned. I wonder if they will like advertisers to see poor reviews. I know I used to go there all the time and now there are other venues.

RVParkReviews is owned by Social Knowledge, a company that owns numerous social media websites. The company doesn't, in any way, influence the content of reviews. If you look at a random selection of campgrounds you will find plenty of unflattering reviews of parks. That hasn't changed nor will it.

[docj]

2gypsies wrote:
I really wish there was a way to block out park owners to make a review on their park. It is so obvious when they do.

The staff at RVParkReviews agrees with you and we maintain a database of known park owner user names but, obviously, most reviews submitted by park owners don't come in marked as "submitted by owner." When we have some evidence that a reviewer is an owner, employee or friend we do return the review to the reviewer with that explanation. If a review is nothing more than a cut and paste from the park's website we do the same.

However, quite often we get glowing reviews that we suspect might have been written by an owner but we post them anyway because we don't have any evidence to back up that assumption. In those cases there simply isn't much we can do.

[et2]

2gypsies wrote:
I've seen some on RV Park Reviews that there has been a bad review given by everyone and then one glorified #10 rating and the reviewer of that rating had 1-3 other posts. To me, that's a sign of either the RV park owner making that #10 rating or a friend/relative. I disregard the whole thing and move on. I really wish there was a way to block out park owners to make a review on their park. It is so obvious when they do.

^^^^^^ This is exactly true.

[Mr_Beebo]

Some folks that post reviews are tent campers, others are RV campers, others are vacationers, etc. Makes a difference in regards to expectations.

[John_S_]

It was also sold and now is corporately owned. I wonder if they will like advertisers to see poor reviews. I know I used to go there all the time and now there are other venues.

[tsetsaf]

2oldman wrote:
As for the reviews, they're silly, but, the bigger problem is that they're not monitored.

Amazon has a good policy where the makers of products actually read reviews, and respond to them. That keeps the internet trolls at bay.

Amazon products are a leader in fake reviews. It is a really big problem there. For the reasons expressed by the OP I have jumped in to www.campgroundviews.com submitting pictures, videos and reviews. We got burned too many times trying to interpret reviews on rvparkreviews plus we found out how many parks they are missing. I have one of those smart phones so it takes five minutes to shoot some vid and pics then send them over.

[2gypsies1]

I've seen some on RV Park Reviews that there has been a bad review given by everyone and then one glorified #10 rating and the reviewer of that rating had 1-3 other posts. To me, that's a sign of either the RV park owner making that #10 rating or a friend/relative. I disregard the whole thing and move on. I really wish there was a way to block out park owners to make a review on their park. It is so obvious when they do.

[Aridon]

Stupid reviews are pretty easy to filter out. I don't expect people to change at least you can see who to ignore.

[Veebyes]

As a fairly regular contributor to RVPR I get a kick out of those who give a low rating because one thing was wrong or the reviewer was expecting a 5 star CG at a 2 star price & did not rate accordingly. They are pretty easy to pick out & ignore.

[et2]

For the most part, I think most people look at reviews in aggregate and base a decision on that, eliminating the useless garbage. I know we do. If there are repetitive complaints regarding less than desired issues, then it's not a desired destination for us.

Rules are rules. The OP's comment about not expecting enforcement of them because of this or that really makes me wonder why they complain about reviews on the web. Shouldn't this be noted when a person makes a reservation that during certain events taking place rules ( which many are posted on campground websites) aren't in effect? I know I read the rules at the campgrounds I plan to stay at before making reservations.

People aren't stupid they can read between the lines in regards to RV Park Reviews. But rules are rules, they're written for a reason. Some people just like to bend them and some campgrounds who don't apply them are hedging their bets by making people believe they enforce them, when they don't.

That's why my rig has wheels, I can move ... And have done so.