Message Forums

I am noticing more and more campsites that do not allow reviews to be left on this website. Im not sure about any one else, but as soon as I see in the review that that campsite owners have stopped reviews, that is sufficient to stop me from even thinking about using that site. The question always springs to mind what have they got to hide?

I think the fact that they have blocked the reviews is probably more damaging than a couple of bad reviews. There are plenty of sites that have picked up some bad reviews but you can also see in later reviews that the site has made efforts to correct any problems and make improvements. In fact there are a few where the owners have left their own review to inform us of the improvements that have been made.

Open and truthful reviews can not only help us campers to find the site that is best for our needs but could also be a useful feedback tool for campsite owners to improve their share of the trade.

What is every one elses views on blocked reviews, do you think the same as me? Also is the website legally obliged to stop reviews or is it done as a goodwill gesture?

Interesting point The only reason I use the camp site search is to read the reviews. There are lots of listings of sites available but I want the honest opinions of others on this website.

Can site Admin comment on the policy and who instigates it and why please.

I am of the same opinion!! Not allowing reviews makes me think ummmm Why?

The only conclusion I can come to is a negative one. Too many people not being satisfied.  There are one or two sites on here that I have noticed over the years have asked for reviews to be removed and no more added.

No reviews allowed = not a second glance. Not even a click on their website.

Avoid like the plague would be my advice.

Why do people always assume the worst?

Could it be that some sites not wanting reviews is a function of bad reviews in the past, and new management wanting to change things but hindered by the previous reputation of the site under old hands?

S

Quote: Originally posted by MadOne on 14/7/2008

---

Why do people always assume the worst?

Could it be that some sites not wanting reviews is a function of bad reviews in the past, and new management wanting to change things but hindered by the previous reputation of the site under old hands?

 

S

---

In that case then they leave their own review telling us that the site has changed hands and to give it another try. No reviews allowed can only be a negative in my book and I'd avoid the site like the plague.

There are not more and more sites that do not allow reviews, there are just 14 that do not allow them.out of around 6,000 listed

Draw from them your own conclusions.

Cheers  Ratty