Stop old reviews

Discussion in 'General Community Discussions' started by We2AreUs, Apr 26, 2020.

  1. We2AreUs

    We2AreUs
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1
    I am seeing reviews from 2011....maybe there should be a year cut-off where it's only for the past say, 3-4 years? Ownership/managers could've changed and the reviews might be totally outdated.
     
    treesprite likes this.
  2. NYDutch

    NYDutch
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    473
    I would prefer to see older reviews kept when newer reviews are not available. I do think though, that an age triggered disclaimer could be a good way to point out the reviews are older and may not describe current conditions.
     
    treesprite likes this.
  3. Texasrvers

    Texasrvers
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    480
    In the past when we have considered removing old reviews, members have told us that 1.) they would prefer to keep the older ones; and 2.) that since every review shows the date that the reviewer was at the park, it is easy to see just how old the review is.
     
  4. Fitzjohnfan

    Fitzjohnfan
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    140
    I vote for keeping old reviews. Not so useful for parks that get at least a few reviews each year, but the parks that don't get reviews, even old info is better than nothing. I know of a park in my area which is a dump, and the last review from 2006 is still accurate. I hope this last (unfavorable) review is kind of a warning to unsuspecting travelers to avoid this place.
     
    treesprite and Rollin Ollens like this.
  5. NYDutch

    NYDutch
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    473
    Of course the dates are there, but when an older review is the first one we see it isn't always that obvious. That's where I think a clear disclaimer, perhaps in a pop-up, would be helpful.
     
    #5 NYDutch, Apr 26, 2020
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2020
    Rollin Ollens likes this.
  6. Texasrvers

    Texasrvers
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    480
    Hey NYDutch, I know you knew the dates were there so I was actually trying to tell the OP why we still post old reviews. But you do have a good point and I will mention it to our programmers.
     
    NYDutch likes this.
  7. leaf peeper

    leaf peeper
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    624
    Likes Received:
    102
    Here's another side of the story. I'm speaking as a review contributor, not a site admin. I submit fairly comprehensive reviews. They usually take me upwards (if not over) an hour to do. I try to be detailed about campground conditions, provide tips on area things to do/places to eat & include pictures if I took any. If my reviews, which I took the time out of my day & made an effort to do, were deleted just because they were considered outdated by someone's arbitrary interpretation of what "old" is, I'd be pretty darned upset.:mad:

    Lori-
     
  8. NYDutch

    NYDutch
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    473
    But would you be upset, Lori, if a disclaimer appeared pointing out that your review was more than 3 years old for instance, and may not describe current conditions?
     
  9. docj

    docj
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,727
    Likes Received:
    466
    Personally, I like having older reviews to compare new ones to. I think trends are important. I get very concerned when I see old reviews that are very favorable to a park giving way to less favorable newer reviews. People always cite the "park changed hands and old reviews aren't fair" rationale for removing old reviews, but good parks can go downhill, also.

    One thing I would like to see would be the ability of a new owner to contact CGR and present information showing that a park has changed hands that that reviews prior to a specific date be flagged as "under previous management." I'm not suggesting removing them, just labeling them as not necessarily being representative, pro or con, of current conditions.
     
    treesprite and Paythebill like this.
  10. Texasrvers

    Texasrvers
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    480
    I think this is in the works, but it may be a while before it is active.

    I am not sure if this action is already planned to be a part of the above function, but I agree that it would be very helpful to label reviews in this manner.
     
    Paythebill likes this.
  11. Rollin Ollens

    Rollin Ollens
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    388

    I'm with Dutch. I like to see ALL reviews and I do check dates anyway. But as far as I'm concerned, I like to see trends. I would be wary if there are only a few reviews for a park that one would expect to have many. A pop up that says the post is three years old or more would probably wake up some folks.

    Darrell
     
    Paythebill likes this.
  12. leaf peeper

    leaf peeper
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    624
    Likes Received:
    102
    The date of stay is in BOLD text at the top of every review & quite prominent. All one has to do is look at the review to see it. It's not like it's buried way down in the review content. I don't see why a disclaimer pointing it out is necessary.
     
    Paythebill and BankShot like this.
  13. BankShot

    BankShot
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,253
    Likes Received:
    1,183
    I can can only speak for myself and give only my opinion on this topic so with that said, here be that opinion. I think what Lori (leaf peeper) says makes sense. The date of the review is, as she states, posted at the top left corner of the review and is in bold letters. I think also what might be happening in many case, especially with new members who have never read CGR's reviews and aren't familiar with all the content and misc. information, is that they just don't see that posted date? Their main interest is getting to the review to get the info they are looking for. It's akin to many new members who will respond to posts on the forum side and not realizing that the post is sometimes 10 or more years old since the last response was made. I like to read older reviews in order to see if any changes have occurred, good or bad, as that helps us determine whether we are willing to give that park or campground a stopover or not. Those of us who have been around a while have all seen and gone thru the various changes and upgrades from RVPR to CGR and so on, and it does take a while to sort thru everything and get use to using new ways to get around and acquire the info we have been use to obtaining "the old way". Some folks, I feel, need to "lighten up" a tad and be a little more patient when changes are made. The old saying, "Slow down and smell the roses" is a good way to look at it me thinks? With all the changes and frustrations we have incurred with those changes and upgrades over the years, this is still one of the best RV sites and forums around IMHO. I've checked others out also just like many of us have, and I continue to stay on board and keep a positive attitude when changes come around. And as I believe I've said before, walk a month or so in an Admin's shoes and see what they go thru and have to put up with some of the "loudmouths" and negative members that are more than likely of the "I want it now" generation and "I don't want to have to learn anything new while I'm wanting it". No doubt one or more of them is going to jump in and rip my head off due to what I've said but hey, if so, then rip away but don't expect a response back from me to further stir the pot negatively on this subject.................

    Happy trails to all, stay safe and stay healthy, BankShot............(aka Terry)
     
    mdcamping, Paythebill and Fun finders like this.
  14. mdcamping

    mdcamping
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    925
    Likes Received:
    463

    I agree with this completly, having a site that encourages member participation on their reviewer profiles allowes:

    fellow members to use that information when choosing a campground/rvpark
    benifits this website on income
    promotion of RV park business through the reviews posted on this site

    and most importantly, it's a form of social expression! :cool:

    please don't remove my old reviews! :)
    Mike
     
    BankShot likes this.
  15. Goshawk

    Goshawk
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2015
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    4
    leave the old reviews. We sometimes copy past our reviews to the five other review sites, so not worried about loosing the data. But still is nice to see information that is historic. What surprises me is the total lack of presence by many campground owners to this space, to counter any review negative comments. Guess maybe there is more focus on time spent at FACEBOOK or GOOGLE to get those reviews clear with response.
     
  16. docj

    docj
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,727
    Likes Received:
    466
    We repeatedly have encouraged park owners to "claim" their listings so they can do things like comment on reviews. Unfortunately, some park owners don't seem to understand the importance of responding to social media comments. Others think that having a commercial service providing relatively canned responses is an adequate effort.
     

Share This Page