We noticed that you're using an unsupported browser. The TripAdvisor website may not display properly.We support the following browsers:
Windows: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome. Mac: Safari.

Minimum acceptable characters

Vacaville...
Level Contributor
1 post
3 reviews
Save Topic
Minimum acceptable characters

Trying to help travelers with reviews. Your minimum characters are unreasonable and frustrating in this process

USA
Level Contributor
7,047 posts
249 reviews
Save Reply
1. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

Welcome to the forum, Snobrd! I am sorry that TripAdvisor staff members rarely respond on this forum. There is a chance that staff have taken note of your comment. TripAdvisor has not changed the minimum character requirement for a while. I doubt that they will. Some people think that TripAdvisor requires too many characters and some feel they require too few. You do not say which camp you belong to.

Pittsburgh...
Level Contributor
6,210 posts
77 reviews
Save Reply
2. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

I can probably figure out which camp based on how the OP was written. Snobrd, the last change TA made to the character count requirement was to increase, not decrease, the minimum. Frankly, I agree with their decision. You can easily knock out 100 characters in less than two sentences, so I might suggest writing in complete sentences rather than fragments.

Furthermore, why not include some sort of detail about your experience? You say you want to help travelers, so help them by giving them information about your visit beyond a simple numeric rating and an opinion statement. If you liked or disliked something, include WHY. You'll have no problem meeting the requirements.

Here are details you could include. For hotels, you can discuss cleanliness, size of the room, convenience of parking, any and all amenities you used, helpfuless of the staff and decor. For restaurants, you have the quality of the food, actually identifying what you ate, service, atmosphere, cleanliness, and again parking. Attractions, well, there's what you saw, staff, parking, value and I'm sure there are more. The bottom line is, when I read a review, I couldn't care less about the reviewer's opinion. I want to know why he has that opinion. Then and only then is the review worth my time to read.

Edited: 17 July 2014, 16:05
Chester, United...
Level Contributor
60,524 posts
72 reviews
Save Reply
3. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

I for one would certainly like the limit to increased

Gravesend, United...
Level Contributor
851 posts
662 reviews
Save Reply
4. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

I agree with both previous replies. I too would like to see the limit increased as to be meaningful and worthwhile we need to know why the reviewer reached the opinion expressed and rating given (as eloquently set out by EC). And to do that needs an increase in characters, not fewer.

Bloomington, Indiana
Destination Expert
for Bloomington
Level Contributor
8,797 posts
22 reviews
Save Reply
5. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

Ditto on what has been said already and I will add that my opinion (unscientific, based on the responses in threads on this topic in this forum), is that the general opinion of long(er) term TA users is that the minimum lengths should be increased rather than decreased.

I also agree with the observation that we can probably guess which way the OP wants the count adjusted and will add that with just a few more characters (perhaps even with fewer characters) this uncertainly would have been eliminated. I think the same can be said about shorter versus longer reviews. Okay, it was bad and you didn't like it . . . but *why* didn't you like it?

(Now, if I counted right that's about 125 characters, not counting this; if you do, it's more like 205.)

hlo

Bodmin, United...
Destination Expert
for Cornwall
Level Contributor
12,591 posts
83 reviews
Save Reply
6. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

another here who would like to see the minimum character limit increased. A short, tweet type review is not at all helpful.

Oregon Coast
Destination Expert
for Crescent City, Oregon Coast, Oregon, Redwood National Park
Level Contributor
43,199 posts
1,081 reviews
Save Reply
7. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

>>Trying to help travelers with reviews. Your minimum characters are unreasonable and frustrating in this process<<

= 111 characters.

Sadly, plenty for a restaurant or attraction review :-(

Snobrd2014, how are you "trying to help travelers with reviews"? Do you own a business and are you "helping" guests write reviews?

It's extraordinarily easy to come up with the minimum 200 characters for a lodging review!

TripAdvisor increased the minimum characters about a year or so ago. The 200 minimum for lodging helped to get rid of the totally worthless 'tweet-reviews'.

I often wish the minimum was 300 for lodging and 200 for dining and attractions. That would further help to increase the quality of TA reviews, IMO.

Wales, United...
Destination Expert
for Bargain Travel, Cruises, Swansea, Cardiff, Carmarthenshire, Neath, Port Talbot
Level Contributor
59,824 posts
452 reviews
Save Reply
8. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

Count me in as another who'd like to see these ridiculously low requirements increased!

Pittsburgh...
Level Contributor
6,210 posts
77 reviews
Save Reply
9. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

Someone once told me that if you have nothing to say, keep your mouth shut. I think those are good words to live by. If you can't actually review your experience, don't bother writing one. It saves us all a lot of aggravation in the end.

10. Re: Minimum acceptable characters

-:- Message from TripAdvisor staff -:-

This topic has been closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.

To review the TripAdvisor Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow this link: http://www.tripadvisor.com/pages/forums_posting_guidelines.html

We remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines, and we reserve the right to remove any post for any reason.

Removed on: 20 July 2015, 05:17