Site Reviews - Oh Boy!

Moderator Edit:

The comment to which you responded has been removed.

I don’t think some folks have any idea of how to review a product of any kind, certainly not in a concise, informative manner. Club confuses issue of Club Sites by asking people to rate a Site (that’s the star system), and then review it. A rating deals with specific items, a review is more personal and can include more detail, such as places of interest close by, shopping/eating/walking/cycling opportunities in vacinity. I like to include something for other dog owners, such as safe walks, car not required to walk dog, etc… I don’t comment much in terms of suitability for children, as we don’t have any.

The weather, the neighbours, the staff aren’t that relevant, as they will be completely different each day/few days. So a comment such as “next door’s dog barked” is ……pointless🤷‍♀️

Like WN, there are some very good site reviewers we tend to trust to choose a CL. Some we have met, and know we share likes and dislikes, others we haven’t met, but they have reviewed somewhere we know, and their experiences are similar to ours, then we would read and take note.

I agree with you JK.  Practically evey site Club site I have been to the wardens have been fine and are usually very helpful and friendly, especially as it must often be a very demanding job.  The lady who was at Bolton Abbey a few weeks ago (whom I believe is usually at Thirsk) was lovely. 

I really don't understand why so many people have such a hang up about the Club rules either, nor why so many cannot simply follow them and/or constantly complain about them as they are not that onerous!

Moderator Edit:

As per T & Cs, if you have any issue with moderation, please contact the Community Manager directly.

I must say that I see nothing wrong whatever in including in a review of a club site some comments about the site managers where it is appropriate, although I accept that if one has  a specific complaint, of a material nature, than that should be raised elsewhere. Even then I would still expect to be freely able to put something in my review. Perhaps I would write something like: I had an unfortunate incident with a site manager about which I have  made a separate complaint.

I should add that I have never actually done such a thing or had to say such a thing in a review. My point is that I see nothing wrong with that if I had had a difficult time with a site manager (or another camper come to that). 

Mostly I have no reason to mention the site managers because, except on arrival, I rarely have any contact. But if I do have contact and I find them either very good or very bad, I shall say so and in my view that is entirely right and proper. 

So just thinking of two recent examples, one from last year and one earlier this year, I was highly praiseworthy of a site manager at Ayr who was lovely, friendly, helpful and always up for a chat. On the other hand, at White Water I found a lady site manager to be cold, unsmiling and inhospitable [and very far from chatty] and so I said so in my review. Are people suggesting that is not valid in a site review? If so, I fundamentally disagree.   

Everything you write in a review is going to be a personal opinion. You read reviews and make your own mind up from the, normally, wide range of views. Star ratings are a vital part of that. My own reviews are always too long, like a lot of my posts here. At least I have worked out how to make proper paragraphs in reviews, rather than be left with a solid block of writing - always so difficult to read. 

I try to comment about things relevant to me - like local transport or walks or cycling - but I will certainly comment about the site and, moreover, if there were a lot of noisy dogs or noisy neighbours, or lots of speeding, or lots of rule breaking generally, I will mention that too. It may be indicative of the site and if it affected my enjoyment of a site, it is worthy of mention. 

Gray, it’s about the club's duty of care to its staff. When wardens are identifiable or called names (I won’t repeat here) in the most horrible way, it is absolutely right for those reviews to be removed. Often the 'reviews' contain no more than complaints and are not reviews at all in the true meaning of the word. If the guidelines on writing reviews are followed, there will be no reason for any to be removed.

People will, rightly or wrongly, use the review section as a means of expressing their frustration if they perceive that site staff have been less than friendly towards them. Human nature I am afraid. Not condoning it but it is bound to happen. Given that a review is about information it is also about your general feelings about your stay. When the Club send out surveys after you have stayed on a site they major quite a lot on how the site staff interacted with you. I appreciate that is private survey and is not published anywhere so allows both Club and member to be more honest in their rating. There are far more reviews that praise staff although I often wonder how a stay has been made so much better by the actions of the site staff? Like others I rarely have any interaction with members of staff beyond the original booking in. Now there are times when site staff do go beyond their brief and that is often when a member suffers some sort of medical or mechanical problem and site staff can often make a real difference and that certainly justifies praise and an honorary mention in despatches.

David

So in the interest of fairness should reviews that only praise the site staff but impart no other meaningful information be taken down?

I think GrayD made a valid point about including his perception of site management, should their attention have been noticeable (and many times they carry on doing their jobs without coming to my attention), within an overall review of the site, extensive it would appear from what he has posted.

I have no particular stand on this point as I rarely visit club sites and secondly rarely leave a review as there never seems to be a shortage of them. If something special strikes me then I will leave one.

Just for the record I have never met a rude warden and the vast majority are pleasant. Only ever met 1 really lazy one, back in the 1990's. Even his fellow wardens were exasperated by him. Doubt I left a review either.

Grayjames said So just thinking of two recent examples, one from last year and one earlier this year, I was highly praiseworthy of a site manager at Ayr who was lovely, friendly, helpful and always up for a chat. On the other hand, at White Water I found a lady site manager to be cold, unsmiling and inhospitable [and very far from chatty] and so I said so in my review. Are people suggesting that is not valid in a site review? If so, I fundamentally disagree.

Sorry GJ, such information is irrelevant for me. Just your perceptions. None of us could know why someone didn’t meet your required facial expression or chat level. The individual concerned could be unwell, have heard bad news, have been on duty during a bad incident, anything🤷‍♀️They are human beings, just like the customers they serve, but don’t have recourse to saying anything about some of the demanding, inconsiderate, rude, selfish, maybe at times abusive people they have to meet and greet. And what’s the relevance of the “lady” tag? Tells me nothing about either Ayr or WWP🤷‍♀️

Thanks for that post ttda

JK