CG pix required for reservation: MH +10 yrs

[Big Bear Local]

Originally Posted by RickO

As I mentioned earlier, my experience through 34 states over the past 5 years leads me to believe that this restriction is mentioned at less than 5% of the parks we've seen. I'm willing to bet that a lot of those only apply it to long term rentals so, IMHO most of this discussion is philosophical rather than addressing something which is actually a practical problem for RVers.

Still a good discussion but not something that is a big problem lurking on the horizon.

Rick

You are exactly right Rick. I use the 10 year rule for long term rental. Not nightly.

[Sequim Guy]

Originally Posted by Kayjulia

That is why I have bought my winter camping spot I know what I have bought into and what the "rules" are and I am happy with that. Now I am looking for my summer camping spot either free and or very low cost where I can make trips from and enjoy at my leisure. I get frustrated at the excessive costs, rules and uneven enforcement of those rules. I have had it with rule Nazis, nosey busy-bodies, drunks, ill mannered foul mouthed, careless, noisy, reckless, loud music playing, people .

Sometimes I like solitude sometimes I like company just in moderation.

It may sound like I'm an old crab but I've had enough of other people's rules and lack of manners and I can and will do something about it because it will be my own place carefully chosen to suit me and my needs.

JMHO as usual your milage may vary

You have discovered the secret. Instead of complaining and whining about
the rules are "discrimination" and "unfair", you DID something about it. You
got a place that has rules you can agree with and be happy.
That's what people do when you are unhappy about a situation, you DO something
about it, not just complain because you think it is "unfair".
Good for you....

.

[Senior Chief]

I'm wondering what it is about this thread or this subject that brings out the ad hominem attacks.

* ad hominem (Latin for "to the man") is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it*

Instead of just (reasonably respectfully) disagreeing on this topic, posters seem to feel the need to label others as whiners, or complainers or lazy or rigid or *whatever*, if they don't conform to their own viewpoint.

I'm not sure why the desire to pig-pile on someone whose opinion is in the minority, but IRV2 is known for the pleasant tone of its forums- perhaps folks who are so quick to flame would think about how it feels when the heat is turned on them And then think twice before hitting the Submit Reply button.

As always, JMHO.

[jauguston]

That rule will never be a issue for us. We avoid the overpriced-crammed in like sardines private RV parks like the plague. State, County and Federal parks for us. No hookup power post required.

Jim

[vtwinwilly]

Originally Posted by jauguston

That rule will never be a issue for us. We avoid the overpriced-crammed in like sardines private RV parks like the plague. State, County and Federal parks for us. No hookup power post required.

Jim

Amen brother... private campgrounds are the exception, not the rule for me. Though I have been in a KOA work-camping for several months now. Maybe I've been there too long!

[pawnotes]

Found this requirement on a campground website in Memphis. This is probably a more reasonable way to handle the issue. It keeps out what some people have referred to in a derogatory tone and doesn't insult the older coaches that are well cared for and consider it discriminatory. JMHO

i. Every RV entering premises must be in good working condition with NO DAMAGE or LEAKS of any kind.

[FW5000DRIVER]

Originally Posted by pawnotes

Found this requirement on a campground website in Memphis. This is probably a more reasonable way to handle the issue. It keeps out what some people have referred to in a derogatory tone and doesn't insult the older coaches that are well cared for and consider it discriminatory. JMHO

i. Every RV entering premises must be in good working condition with NO DAMAGE or LEAKS of any kind.

What? That's discrimination! I should be able to have my RV leak anywhere and I shouldn't have to cover up holes in my RV. Ha! That was me pretending to be a drama king.

[jauguston]

How ANYONE could expect to use the term "In good working condition" to decide whether a RV is suitable for occupancy in their park is just plain nuts. That phrase has no definition that could possibly apply. If the engine has a overheating problem when climbing long hills will it be rejected? That would be considered "Not in good working condition" in my book.

I think for the most part we are discussing a non-issue(-:

Jim

[Macpeety]

Originally Posted by jauguston

How ANYONE could expect to use the term "In good working condition" to decide whether a RV is suitable for occupancy in their park is just plain nuts. That phrase has no definition that could possibly apply. If the engine has a overheating problem when climbing long hills will it be rejected? That would be considered "Not in good working condition" in my book.

I think for the most part we are discussing a non-issue(-:

Jim

Actually I agree with the conditions because it allows them to turn away some that move from cg to cg with their rig mostly always being worked on. This allows a broad brush for undesirables to be turned away. (moderator edit)

I applaud this CG.

I apologize for my post having to be edited by the mod. No malice was intended.
Thanks, mod.

[corjaguar]

Originally Posted by JC2

Send them this picture if they want one.

I see nothing wrong with this rig......maybe he should have used a extra bungee to tie the antenna down.

[Sequim Guy]

Originally Posted by Senior Chief

I'm wondering what it is about this thread or this subject that brings out the ad hominem attacks.

* ad hominem (Latin for "to the man") is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it*

Instead of just (reasonably respectfully) disagreeing on this topic, posters seem to feel the need to label others as whiners, or complainers or lazy or rigid or *whatever*, if they don't conform to their own viewpoint.

I'm not sure why the desire to pig-pile on someone whose opinion is in the minority, but IRV2 is known for the pleasant tone of its forums- perhaps folks who are so quick to flame would think about how it feels when the heat is turned on them And then think twice before hitting the Submit Reply button.

As always, JMHO.

OK then, what term would you use to describe a person or persons that
complain about a completely legal action taken by campground owners. They
describe it as unfair and discriminatory because they disagree with it, and
continue to do so even after it has been pointed out that it is legal. So far
they have offered no solutions to the problem, probably because there is no
way for them, or any of us, to change the situation.
To me, that pretty much defines "whine":
.......... 1. complain in a peevish, self-pitying way
.......... 2. to complain or protest in a childish fashion.


And as for how I would feel if the heat were turned on me, well believe me,
I have had my share of heat around here. But as my Dad used to say,
"If you can't take it, don't dish it out."

And I do think twice about hitting the "Submit Reply", because I'm never
sure if I've dished out enough.....


.

[Midniteoyl]

Originally Posted by Sequim Guy

OK then, what term would you use to describe a person or persons that
complain about a completely legal action taken by campground owners. They
describe it as unfair and discriminatory because they disagree with it, and
continue to do so even after it has been pointed out that it is legal. So far
they have offered no solutions to the problem, probably because there is no
way for them, or any of us, to change the situation.
To me, that pretty much defines "whine":
.......... 1. complain in a peevish, self-pitying way
.......... 2. to complain or protest in a childish fashion.


And as for how I would feel if the heat were turned on me, well believe me,
I have had my share of heat around here. But as my Dad used to say,
"If you can't take it, don't dish it out."

And I do think twice about hitting the "Submit Reply", because I'm never
sure if I've dished out enough.....


.

Whatever man.. Read the posts again, I gave a solution..

[Macpeety]

Originally Posted by Sequim Guy

OK then, what term would you use to describe a person or persons that
complain about a completely legal action taken by campground owners. They
describe it as unfair and discriminatory because they disagree with it, and
continue to do so even after it has been pointed out that it is legal. So far
they have offered no solutions to the problem, probably because there is no
way for them, or any of us, to change the situation.
To me, that pretty much defines "whine":
.......... 1. complain in a peevish, self-pitying way
.......... 2. to complain or protest in a childish fashion.


And as for how I would feel if the heat were turned on me, well believe me,
I have had my share of heat around here. But as my Dad used to say,
"If you can't take it, don't dish it out."

And I do think twice about hitting the "Submit Reply", because I'm never
sure if I've dished out enough.....


.

and disregard the ones that continually disagree and stir the pot. Might be the only attention they can muster.

[Jack1234]

Originally Posted by Midniteoyl

Whatever man.. Read the posts again, I gave a solution..

Really!,,,,!!!!

I asked you repeatedly to offer some constructive solution or alternatives to the 10yr rule and you refuses to answer. So help me out....what exactly is your suggested solution to the CG owner who wishes to establish some criteria for condition and appearance of the RV"s in his campground....I'm waiting.