What are reviews for?

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

I’ve stopped referring to reviews as an aid to deciding if I want to stop at a particular site. The club website gives me all the information I need about the actual site, size, facilities, access, etc. As for the local area and places to visit, in the time it takes to read a reasonable number of reviews, I can trawl the internet and get all the information I want.

I agree with both paragraphs. With reference to the first; there is already sufficient censorship on this site. As for only permitting staff to respond to reviews that would seem a waste of time as they do not respond to reviews!

A case in point has been two reviews about the route to Gowerton which, if I did not know better would have put me off ever visiting. The reviewers both seem to have approached the site from the wrong direction through two narrow bridges one of which is signed as 2.3m max width. Staff should have picked up on this and commented on the review itself but obviously don't read and comment

Personally, I write a review to give information for future visitors, so approaches, site facilities,  an idea of the site, the size of the pitches,or anything that may affect your stay and what is around it, especially if there are new shops, restaurants, or supermarkets. Also any places that give discounts to club members. I always base these on permanent things, so barking, dogs never come into it. Also I always give a pat on the back to the wardens, if merited of course but it usually is.  

I would agree with this, but also like to provide information on phone / 4G, at least for the two networks we have. This information is not easily available from other sources, as the coverage maps the networks publish are often grossly misleading.

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

Content has been removed.

What about reviewers who have stepped out of line on site, then deliberately told untruth's about the situation. In the last year I had a conversation with a warden and he outlined 2 occasions where incidents had taken place then the reviewer slammed the wardens and the site in the reviews.

I take more notice of some reviewers than others particularly if it seems someone has 'an axe to grind'

I wonder if we are now experiencing the trip advisor effect, you know the one several hundred good/average reviews then a horrendous one.  I always think that person is on the look out for a freebie    

A lot of times a very negative review is the members first post. There is no other activity. To me it just suggests someone who has been upset by something wanting to let of steam. Where as a negative, from a generally positive poster says a lot more.

I agree that we don't need to have access to reviews for our comments (I have added a few myself over the years but I'd be happy not to.) We do have access to report a review. I've used this facility a couple of times. The club responded to one of the reviews which was quite a distressing one about animal neglect, others may have reported the same review. Another review I reported recently was an aggressive tirade about a CL I've used, it didn't read true to form and as far as I know no action has been taken to moderate the review. The club doesn't respond to review reports but I do hope they act or investigate them. In fact it's most important that Club show they are actively engaged in "reviewing" reviews to give members confidence.

I personally think people should be able to write freely in reviews but with guidelines and the much needed advice that the club will be actively looking at reviews, acting appropriately and responding as needed with the guidance that members bring up concerns on site too.  The C&CC pre-moderates reviews and this seems to work whilst leaving complaints about poor facilities etc in place.

The review section on the site details pages needs an advice paragraph before people start their review.