Reviewing the Reviews
As we are off to Wharfedale this weekend I thought I'd better look at the reviews. Very interesting. By far the biggest number of criticisms refer not to the site but to fellow members....especially in relation to dogs (barking and fouling) and speeding. Perhaps we should have a feature where we can openly talk about the misdemeanours of fellow members to bring it home to them that belonging to the Club carries with it responsibilities?
Personally I have stopped leaving reviews of Club sites because (a) the sites are generally quite good, (b) the staff are generally quite good and (c) fellow campers with dubious regard for other can be found at ANY and indeed ALL Club sites! But us MOGs (Miserable Old Gits) know it's not a Club thing, it is the new "normal" in society as a whole.
Now I've lit the blue touch paper I'll stand well back............
Moderator Comment:
Why 'light the blue touch paper' at all? Seems like a deliberate attempt to cause problems so this thread will be closely monitored.
Comments
-
I find reviews interesting if they mention the local area, places visited, actual walking distances, buses etc. I skim over much else unless someone says there's a huge warden with a terrible temper who makes people stand by their vans whilst he reads out the rules.
1 -
It’s pointless writing a review about what happened on site on one particular visit as that's not a constant factor. However, it seems to be what most people do as they believe a review should relate their experience.
This is another example of the blurring of lines between reviews, stories and the forum but quite how it’s resolved, I don't know.
I don’t think it would be a great idea to have a forum section to specifically talk about the misdeeds of other members. There’s enough of that now and it often results in arguments and warnings. In any case, the culprits are unlikely to read it as only a small proportion of the membership uses CT. If some people can’t be bothered to follow the simple site rules, I can’t see them taking anything said on here seriously.
0 -
I skim the reviews and ignore comments about campers or dogs generally. Possibly even noise levels unless they say a motorway/dual carriageway way borders the site. Like brue what I find useful are what's around by walking, whether there are pavements, l oral shops pubs etc and if it's on a bus route frequency of service and destination. I know shat standard to expect on club sites and am interested in any facilities on CL and there quality.
0 -
I agree, David. It’s of no interest to others thinking of visiting a site to know the reviewer had good/bad weather or that the neighbour's children were noisy.
1 -
Perhaps we should have a feature where we can openly talk about the misdemeanours of fellow members to bring it home to them that belonging to the Club carries with it responsibilities?
I thought that was what this forum was for
The content of a review is entirely what the reviewer thought at the time. Whilst the misdemeanours of other members may appear boring and no use to some they may well point to a more general concern that the Club needs to attend to. Two examples would be the control of dogs and the speed of vehicles both subjects the Club is in the process of trying to deal with. So whilst they may not be of any direct interest to those seeking information about the site they are none the less important in assessing membership concerns. Site reviews predated the site surveys that are now sent out and perhaps the surveys would be a better vehicle to channel such complaints as the information is more likely to be collated into meaningful statistics for the Club to work out a strategy to tackle them if indeed there was a need.
David
2 -
Sounds very much like a wind up post to me.
Hope the OP enjoys Wharfedale site.
0 -
yes + 1
I also try to point out any new shops or restaurants that have sprung up or may help future campers
0 -
That could well be backed up by OP’s(highlighted in bold) sentence. Folk don’t generally type that if the post is genuine they do it to create a playground☹️
0 -
We've had our CL for 4 years now and had 36 reviews. Having chatted to most of our visitors, if they are visiting an area for the first time, or, are looking for a change, they will base their judgment on reading reviews. EV.
1 -
I always write reviews for CLs we've stayed on, but rarely for club sites. I try to include ease of access, information about pitches (for TV/phone reception), facilities, views, places of interest & walks nearby, a dog exercise area (if there is one) and a word about the actual facilities. I might comment if there are more than 5 units but that's been very rare in our experience. I don't think I've ever commented on fellow users or what they get up to - but then I'm not looking out for that sort of thing!
1 -
Reviews about life & the places people visit …….our policy is take everything that's written good & bad with a large pinch of salt .
Go yourself , do it yourself ….then you can make your own judgements.👍
1 -
It’s pointless writing a review about what happened on site on one particular visit as that's not a constant factor. However, it seems to be what most people do as they believe a review should relate their experience.
I don't believe that it is necessarily pointless commenting on what problems occur on site. If it is an ongoing theme then it may highlight an ongoing site problem.
0 -
I made a slightly flippant comment at the beginning but people should feel free to write what they want to about their site visits. I find certain types of informative reviews useful, about the site and the locality but if users want to let off steam they can, it would be boring to read predictable "controlled" reviews.
CL reviews are very useful as many still don't have much information or even photos, a pity more aren't written.
2 -
I try to write reviews of all CL'S and some Club Sites, I try to include details that I would find useful if reading a review, including places of interest nearby. Obviously if someone has a bad experience on a site I can see why they would include it on a review, however I wouldn't worry to much unless it was likely to happen if I were staying on site.
I do find some infomative site reviews useful.and do wish more people would write them.
0 -
Because, Dear Moderator, it is a "Forum"....i.e. free speech, heavily defended and fought for....but bitter experience on Club Forum tells me that ANYTHING some people say will arouse emotion. If you think this was a deliberate attempt to cause problems think again. It was a deliberate attempt to highlight a fact....that people leaving reviews often find they have been disappointed by the behaviour of fellow members spoiling their time in what should have been a faultless experience. The Club needs to recognise that.
1 -
I read reviews about sites I might consider, but I tend to disregard anything that won't affect my visit, such as the dog that barked on the pitch behind, or the car that was speeding at 4pm, or the child riding a scooter wrong way round the site roads! They won't have anything to do at all with my visit, and are unlikely to influence my decision to stay, unlike say if the site had great views, the facilities are what I need, or I can access a great bike ride! The first examples are just Joe Public out and about, the latter are indicators of what the site is like!
0 -
The club try their best to provide sites that suit a variety of people. The moderators try their best to keep the forum running smoothly. Using a thread to "light the blue touch paper" takes advantage of the fact that although we have free speech we also have CT guidelines and T&Cs which all of us have signed up for in agreement. If your forum experience has been "bitter" you might need to contact the club rather than attempt to raise a posse of fellow complainants on here.
3 -
I feel that honest reviews, including irritations, can be of significant value to others. If someone posts, for example, that children made a lot of noise and similar posts are left for the same site, then the reader can make an informed decision as to when to stay, if at all. I’ve found most full CAMC sites to be very civilised, to a point of irritation almost. But if that’s what members want, then it’s their choice. If I want evening singalongs, a bar on site and the facilities of a family resort, then I might find reviews useful, in our case, they would also help our decision not to go there. I once posted about a site, that if you need WiFi, then you’d find connection difficult. The next person posted that WiFi wasn’t necessary on holiday - ahem. I informed, they opinionated.
1
