|
|
Post by Mike Harding on Apr 1, 2024 12:22:21 GMT 10
There is a small camping area in Cavendish, Victoria which, I believe, is controlled by the local council. It has a resident caravan based caretaker. It charges $20 or $30 per night unpowered/powered. It has a BBQ area and some toilets/showers. It's about one acre some of which is not level. It's OK but basically a bit of scrub.
A couple of months past I dropped in to take a look and subsequently submitted a Wiki Camps review. The review quickly received one negative response (the caretaker is my guess) but after a week or so received two positive responses. There were previous reviews also criticising the site due to cost. A few positive reviews too.
Things stayed that way for about two months then a few days past I noticed my review had been deleted: no explanation, no email, no indication of the deletion, just vanished into thin air. I'm assuming someone, perhaps the caretaker, had complained. Just guesswork but hard to see why else it should be removed.
I've today submitted another short and critical review and will be watching carefully to see what happens.
Unless Wiki Camps is above pressure from people with vested interests to remove negative reviews then it's not much use to anyone and, in any event, it should have the courtesy and even handedness to contact the reviewer before deleting.
|
|
|
|
Post by arewelost on Apr 1, 2024 13:03:58 GMT 10
I get peeved when I hear stories of censorship. Looking at the reviews it does seem there is an agenda to give thumbs down to any comments about high prices. One reviewer made some positive comments but finished with "Be sure you have cash to pay". That heinous sentence earned two thumbs down.
So you will find a fresh green tick on your review. I also ticked a few others that made similar comments.
However, I did that based on censorship, not really on the basis that prices are too high. From the photos it looks like there is plenty of room, and with facilities, although basic, I don't think $30 a night for a powered site is over the top. $20 unpowered for riverfront seems OK too. So, not cheap, but not over the top.
Reading the rules, I get a feeling of a little pedantic, and then capped with a 5kph speed limit. 5kph is ridiculous. In the photos, there is an old 2015 version of the Welcome page where it refers to the (still current) 20 amps to be shared with 2 sites. So you might want to advise your neighbour if running high power devices. That might be tough around dinner time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike Harding on Apr 1, 2024 13:37:19 GMT 10
Hi AWL
Opinions regarding campsites are, of course, highly subjective and that's fine as it provides a good cross section.
Having used Wiki Camps for some years it seems to me there are two main groups of reviewers:
1 - The people on holiday. They travel once or twice a year for a few weeks.
2 - The regular travellers. They travel for weeks or months at a time.
Group 1 are generally prepared to pay high costs as they are "on holiday" and will usually only stay for one or two nights. They are in "holiday" mood and providing the site does not have overflowing toilets or the like think pretty much anything is good.
Group 2 is much more critical both on price and quality.
In regard to Cavendish: I balance it against (Vic sites) Lockington, Minyip, Brim, Willaura etc which are all better set out with proper water and power to each site and half the price of Cavendish. Also note the "river" through Cavendish is currently, and often, dry so the photographs are a touch optimistic.
Thanks for your support AWL - it bothers me that Wiki Camps deletes reviews in such a trivial manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by peter57 on Apr 1, 2024 18:32:57 GMT 10
Could be that Cindy from GN is the mod there as well. I see Brodie Allen over at GN has had to remove/had removed a little signature line on his sign off that was quite popular while it lasted.
|
|
|
|
Post by yobarr on Apr 1, 2024 21:58:29 GMT 10
I get peeved when I hear stories of censorship. Looking at the reviews it does seem there is an agenda to give thumbs down to any comments about high prices. One reviewer made some positive comments but finished with "Be sure you have cash to pay". That heinous sentence earned two thumbs down. So you will find a fresh green tick on your review. I also ticked a few others that made similar comments. However, I did that based on censorship, not really on the basis that prices are too high. From the photos it looks like there is plenty of room, and with facilities, although basic, I don't think $30 a night for a powered site is over the top. $20 unpowered for riverfront seems OK too. So, not cheap, but not over the top. Reading the rules, I get a feeling of a little pedantic, and then capped with a 5kph speed limit. 5kph is ridiculous. In the photos, there is an old 2015 version of the Welcome page where it refers to the (still current) 20 amps to be shared with 2 sites. So you might want to advise your neighbour if running high power devices. That might be tough around dinner time. Any "review" of any product should be taken with a grain of salt. Some years ago it was revealed that a large Solar Sales and Installation company was paying their customers handsomely to give glowing reviews of the rubbish that they were marketing as "Top quality". All equipment was rubbish. This is by no means an uncommon occurrence. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Harding on Apr 2, 2024 8:50:12 GMT 10
It didn't take long  Within 24 hours there is one negative response to my review, my money's on the caretaker, maybe he's on commission? Note: all the non positive reviews have at least one negative response. |
|
Within 24 hours there is one negative response to my review, my money's on the caretaker, maybe he's on commission?