|
thesweetcheat wrote: nigelswift wrote: Yeah I agree. I confess my initial reaction was to be a bit snooty about how little they knew, but then it struck me - that's exactly the attitude a lot of archaeos take towards us and this website!
True, but if you give a tomb a 1 star review because it's not a very nice "house", it won't exactly encourage other visitors! People will just see the 1 star and no bother going to see for themselves.
I really love the utter banality of the Tripadvisor site. Bundling archaeology sites next to someone reviewing how poorly a 16 year old burger-flipper served them a Zinger Burger at the KFC in Paisley... or how great an Avacado and Stilton Cob was at a Marks and Spencer Cafe in Norwich. And having people review these things using whatever criteria they wish and then spread a generous layer of their personal prejudices on top... It is genius!
I do find it hilarious.
Stonehenge being described as "a bit too old and knocked about". There are any number of reviews of scottish monuments (eg. The Scott Monument in Embra) which describes them as "too high" or "the stairs are too steep". There is one of the mountain Ben Nevis which describes it as "A hard walk" there is even one which reviews the mountain thus...
"Ben Nevis is certainly worth seeing. We didn't do the hike... The camping and cafés at the bottom are very pleasant."
There are some real niche reviewers though, some who specialise in reviewing the soap type, hot water and availability of soft toilet rolls or otherwise in cafe toilets. I remember reading a review of a B&B which raved about the Imperial Leather Soap in their room and how it was "a high end item" and not the usual "cheap supermarket brands" found in other B&B's.
Embrace the nonsense. I think am going to review Crichton Soutterain and describe it as "a bit dirty and dark".
In reply to:
Re: (thesweetcheat) | |
Replies:
Re: (thesweetcheat)
|
|
