Community Forums

SeeTheUSA · 03-18-2018, 08:10 AM

As most already know, campgroundreviews.com became more involved in scrutinizing the park reviews submitted after it became a business-owned entity a few years ago. If you don’t say enough it likely will be kicked back to you with suggestions of what you might want to add, your positive reviews might seem to fly through their review process while your other ones seem to linger, maybe even be kicked back. You might often be asked to add more details and certainly not include anything that might be construed as controversial.

Here’s one quoted below, it’s for Bay View Park in Rockport, TX. Seems odd some of it would be allowed:

“The park probably used to be beautiful, but now it lacks natural beauty due to Hurricane Harvey. Don't go here if you are a minority. The staff weren't very friendly. It was the "whitest" RV park I've ever been in. They make a point to let you know you're not welcome and don't ever come back. I enjoyed my stay cause it was not crowded this time of year, very peaceful. Met a nice couple who were very friendly, but not the staff. I'll never go back.”

Maybe it’s just me, but perhaps campgroundreviews.com’s standards have been relaxed and all can more freely say what they really think. From my perspective, however, this kind of thing ought to be discussed elsewhere. Perhaps this one just slipped through the cracks.

manderson2228 · 03-18-2018, 08:41 AM

I see no issue with it. The person said it professionally, and if that is his/her opinion that is his or her opinion. You say something like that you probably have some examples and something happen.

When we did we get to a point in society where we can only say things that don't ruffle someone elses feathers. I try to ruffle someone elses feathers 2 times a day at least!

SeeTheUSA · 03-18-2018, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manderson2228

I see no issue with it. The person said it professionally, and if that is his/her opinion that is his or her opinion. You say something like that you probably have some examples and something happen.

When we did we get to a point in society where we can only say things that don't ruffle someone elses feathers. I try to ruffle someone elses feathers 2 times a day at least!

Substitute the “whitest” part in the review with any other racial group and it might not fly.

sbleiweiss · 03-18-2018, 08:48 AM

I think if you have reviews of something you have to let anyone say what they want. Otherwise readers can't trust the reviews to be accurate. I once saw an Air BNB host post a response that basically said I can't believe these posters said what they did on a public forum. All the reviewer had done was criticize the host for how they treated the renter. Well hey, what are reviews for?

Coral · 03-18-2018, 08:53 AM

I like honest reviews too, if a place is racist or has a lot of people that appear to be that type I would personally not want to visit.

docj · 03-18-2018, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeeTheUSA

As most already know, campgroundreviews.com became more involved in scrutinizing the park reviews submitted after it became a business-owned entity a few years ago. If you don’t say enough it likely will be kicked back to you with suggestions of what you might want to add, your positive reviews might seem to fly through their review process while your other ones seem to linger, maybe even be kicked back. You might often be asked to add more details and certainly not include anything that might be construed as controversial.

As someone who was as administrator of RVParkReviews before it was acqiured by Social Knowledge, I can say without hesitation that reviews have always been scrutinized before being posted. We believe that this is what makes RVPR different from most other websites where reviews are pretty much posted as submitted. We see nothing wrong with asking a reviewer to add details about a park to help other readers decide if the park is suitable for them.

As for not including "anything that might be controversial", we sure don't screen out negative reviews; there are plenty of them in the database. If a reviewer is describing a bad experience we do ask that the language used be reasonably objective with a minimum of emotion. Furthermore, we ask that all reviews include some useful information about the park in additional to the reported bad experience.

As with any entity that is run by a group (in this case a group of volunteer administrators) each person interprets the website policies in a slightly different manner. Therefore, there is some variability as to what constitutes an acceptable review. However, on the average, I think RVPR's reviews are a cut-above many others, but, of course, I'm biased.

In the case of the review in question, the reviewer felt uncomfortable at this park and decided that it was important to warn others. As already has been mentioned, it was done reasonably objectively, with a minimum of emotion. I, for one, feel that it was appropriate for the comment to be posted as written.

As for the comment that substituting some other ethnicity for "white" would have made this review unacceptable, I can tell you for fact that there are a significant number of reviews in our database of "french speaking" snow bird parks, mostly in Florida, where reviewers have noted their discomfort when they realized they didn't "fit in" with the majority of a park's customers. Similarly, there have been reviews by younger RVers about parks where they have felt out of place because they weren't seniors! Such situations exist and IMO it's better to be honest about them.

SeeTheUSA · 03-18-2018, 12:26 PM

French speaking and younger RVers are not racial groups.

manderson2228 · 03-19-2018, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeeTheUSA

Substitute the “whitest” part in the review with any other racial group and it might not fly.

You're not wrong with that comment. That is kind of a separate issue, this particular issue if accurate was presented professionally. If we have evidence that something got rejected the other way then we have cause for concern.

36PFT · 03-19-2018, 08:04 AM

We submitted a negative review for a campground that was not published....No longer will use that site even to read reviews.

Flyerone · 03-19-2018, 08:09 AM

I had the same result, posted a bad review and received an email asking us to post some positive things along with the negative. Our post was never published.

**TonyDi** · 03-19-2018, 10:17 AM

What about the person that has an axe to grind, and is using the review as a way to "get even"?

SeeTheUSA · 03-19-2018, 11:29 AM

I guess it’s okay to perhaps suggest a particular race of people is unfriendly as long as you say it “professionally.”

Also could be this particular person was unfriendly to the staff, got something similar in return. Would it then be okay to point out the race of that reviewer? Professionally, of course.

PanJH · 03-19-2018, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 36PFT

We submitted a negative review for a campground that was not published....No longer will use that site even to read reviews.

Same thing happened to me a few years ago - I can't trust any of the reviews if they are the ones to approve or censor the input.

docj · 03-19-2018, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyerone

I had the same result, posted a bad review and received an email asking us to post some positive things along with the negative. Our post was never published.

With all due respect, you would NEVERhave been asked to post positive things along with the negative ones. What you were asked was to post some information about the park that would be helpful to others trying to decide if the park is suitable for them. Usually, I give people examples, such as, "was there anything you particularly liked or disliked?", "did you use any of the park's amenities and, if so, how were they?" etc, etc.

If a person's entire review is a complaint about one particular aspect of a park or a particular interaction with a staff member, it is totally worthless to others who don't encounter the same issue. Some people choose to make their entire reviews about poor wifi or an inadequate and dirty pet run, to name just two common topics. If, OTOH, you're a person who doesn't use park wifi and/or doesn't have a dog, then a review that is limited to just these topics will not help you make a decision about a park. Therefore, we ask people to broaden their reviews so they are applicable to a broader range of RVers.

However, I reiterate that we do not ask reviewers to include positive information about a park to balance the negatives.