- Joined
- Sep 5, 2003
- Location
- Avenel, New Jersey
spybarbie said:
FIRST.....Thank You Caruso.
As you said, I was paying Chucho a compliment.
Chucho is a VERY good friend of mine.
SECOND...SPYBARBIE
WTF are you talking about?
Casino City and Ecogra
- Thread starter caruso
- Start date
-
- Tags
- casino city ecogra
FIRST.....Thank You Caruso.
As you said, I was paying Chucho a compliment.
Chucho is a VERY good friend of mine.
SECOND...SPYBARBIE
WTF are you talking about?
Jetset's double standards are spectacular.
When portals he considers to be his "enemy" carry casinos he disapproves of, he jumps on the banner-waving bandwagon. Shame on these portals for daring to carry casinos that slow-pay players! (Grand Banks **hint hint**) Root them out and kill them off!
Now, we have a portal which 1) lists every rogue casino under the sun without a single disclaimer and 2) has done so for a LONG time and with an apparent absolute lack of any knowledge of the casino scene or the nature of the roguedom. This is however acceptable to Jetset because his casino interests are well served with this potential legal challenge to the DoJ and the subsequent free-flowing US gambling dollar.
Anything to turn a buck. I hope players can see through this sickening charade.
Where is the challenge to this portal to do its homework? Where is the responsible admonishment issued by ANY one person on the industry side for this lack of responsibility? You jump on your "enemies" quickly enough - how about a word or two to the wise for people carrying Windows, Crystal Palace, Net Gaming? Good grief.
Just spectacular, sickening double standards.
I hope this action fails. And considering the substance behind it, I'm optimistic.
When portals he considers to be his "enemy" carry casinos he disapproves of, he jumps on the banner-waving bandwagon. Shame on these portals for daring to carry casinos that slow-pay players! (Grand Banks **hint hint**) Root them out and kill them off!
Now, we have a portal which 1) lists every rogue casino under the sun without a single disclaimer and 2) has done so for a LONG time and with an apparent absolute lack of any knowledge of the casino scene or the nature of the roguedom. This is however acceptable to Jetset because his casino interests are well served with this potential legal challenge to the DoJ and the subsequent free-flowing US gambling dollar.
Anything to turn a buck. I hope players can see through this sickening charade.
Where is the challenge to this portal to do its homework? Where is the responsible admonishment issued by ANY one person on the industry side for this lack of responsibility? You jump on your "enemies" quickly enough - how about a word or two to the wise for people carrying Windows, Crystal Palace, Net Gaming? Good grief.
Just spectacular, sickening double standards.
I hope this action fails. And considering the substance behind it, I'm optimistic.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2004
- Location
- UK
jetset said:
That was me, I think.
Jetset, why should a player respond to an individual portal that carries dubious casinos? They earn money from this and seem to have sophisticated software that automates research on the internet (though I wonder if there's really no human interaction in the process - not even cross-checking of info?). It would take an afternoon for one person to go through the basic points of reference on the web and come up with a list of rogue casinos, assuming that's what they wanted to do.
Should I also write to all the other portals? Isn't it perhaps better if we do post on here (in one central place) and if the portals really do have a conscience they'll check here and find it?
jetset said:
I've no axe to grind with him - but he came here to post about the challenge to the DoJ and get some useful exposure for his website in the process. If the experience makes him rethink (or speed up) the exposure of rogue casinos, then great, but I don't see the need for a dialogue - there are a few casinos it's hard to place, but most of the rogues are obvious to anyone interested in identifying them.
jetset said:
I don't see an ulterior motive - just the usual aim of making a profit that's behind any business. The action against the DoJ may be a good thing (I've no idea of the details), but I'm sure it's based on business calculations. There's nothing wrong with that, but the excessive praise from some quarters on here can only be explained by obvious relief that a bigger company is supporting their own interests.
One last point: I don't agree with your criticism of creating an 'us and them' situation, as that's just the way things are. Casinos have different interests to portal owners, who have different interests to players. Society as a whole also has its own interests, and I'm not sure an increase in the exposure of the on-line gambling industry is really one of them.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
Vesuvio:
You made a couple comments in your recent post that I would like to address:
In terms of players choosing casinos, I would be the first to say that at the present time using our information without also consulting other sources would not provide the well-rounded picture a player should want. However, I do want to repeat again it is not our desire or intention to earn money from dubious casinos. As as said in an earlier post, we have business relationships with perhaps 1% of the casinos in our directory, and receive no financial benefit from the others besides the indirect benefit we might receive as a result of providing a web resource that includes a comprehensive directory. In terms of human interaction in our research, we do plenty of that also. For example, we have thusfar called the top 1/3 of all gaming sites (around 700) to obtain ownership and other information. The process I was referencing as automated was the process of creating images of the home pages, and the construction of pages about individual casinos, not gathering data about individual casinos, which is done by real people.
Actually, this is not true. Casinomeister posted the news of our lawsuit on his own, and without any prompting on the part of me or anyone involved in Casino City because he decided it was interesting news. I signed up and began making posts to respond to others on this board. A temporary but very embarrasing glitch on our site was exposed here relating to eCOGRA seals, which we addressed in minutes of being aware of that issue. This then turned into a discussion of our treatment of rogue casinos, which is an area I agree is very important for us to handle appropriately, and I am working to make sure we are responsible in this area as fast as humanly possible.
I actually didn't make this decision based on a profit calculation. In fact, many on my staff questioned whether it was a good business decision. I did it because I felt it was the right thing to do, while feeling there was a reasonable change it was not a stupid business decision. Certainly I do hope it does not end up being a big mistake for the business - my wife and my staff don't exactly appreciate significant mistakes on that front.
You made a couple comments in your recent post that I would like to address:
In terms of players choosing casinos, I would be the first to say that at the present time using our information without also consulting other sources would not provide the well-rounded picture a player should want. However, I do want to repeat again it is not our desire or intention to earn money from dubious casinos. As as said in an earlier post, we have business relationships with perhaps 1% of the casinos in our directory, and receive no financial benefit from the others besides the indirect benefit we might receive as a result of providing a web resource that includes a comprehensive directory. In terms of human interaction in our research, we do plenty of that also. For example, we have thusfar called the top 1/3 of all gaming sites (around 700) to obtain ownership and other information. The process I was referencing as automated was the process of creating images of the home pages, and the construction of pages about individual casinos, not gathering data about individual casinos, which is done by real people.
Actually, this is not true. Casinomeister posted the news of our lawsuit on his own, and without any prompting on the part of me or anyone involved in Casino City because he decided it was interesting news. I signed up and began making posts to respond to others on this board. A temporary but very embarrasing glitch on our site was exposed here relating to eCOGRA seals, which we addressed in minutes of being aware of that issue. This then turned into a discussion of our treatment of rogue casinos, which is an area I agree is very important for us to handle appropriately, and I am working to make sure we are responsible in this area as fast as humanly possible.
I actually didn't make this decision based on a profit calculation. In fact, many on my staff questioned whether it was a good business decision. I did it because I felt it was the right thing to do, while feeling there was a reasonable change it was not a stupid business decision. Certainly I do hope it does not end up being a big mistake for the business - my wife and my staff don't exactly appreciate significant mistakes on that front.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2004
- Location
- UK
Casino City,
Thanks for your articulate reply. You're right about how you appeared on this website - I hadn't followed all the posts. I also hope the lawsuit doesn't turn out badly for your business as you do seem genuinely interested in doing the right thing!
In reply to the other points:
1) I didn't intend to say this time that you were earning money from the rogue casinos. I just meant that the directory's run to make money so it's reasonable if you spend a small proportion of that doing some research into how trustworthy the casinos are. I thought Jetset's suggestion of us all writing in was a bit strange & I'm sure you can easily get a grip on the issue without that.
2) I originally said you could be expected to investigate the casinos you listed as it wasn't just an automatically generated directory of the type you usually see on the internet - you then said it was a highly automated process (giving the example of screenshots). I was then probing to see if you did also manually generate the information for each casino. I see you do so obviously it does give you the chance to check the casinos a little more closely. From your posts I'm sure you will and it sounds as though your directory could become very useful for players in the future.
Thanks for your articulate reply. You're right about how you appeared on this website - I hadn't followed all the posts. I also hope the lawsuit doesn't turn out badly for your business as you do seem genuinely interested in doing the right thing!
In reply to the other points:
1) I didn't intend to say this time that you were earning money from the rogue casinos. I just meant that the directory's run to make money so it's reasonable if you spend a small proportion of that doing some research into how trustworthy the casinos are. I thought Jetset's suggestion of us all writing in was a bit strange & I'm sure you can easily get a grip on the issue without that.
2) I originally said you could be expected to investigate the casinos you listed as it wasn't just an automatically generated directory of the type you usually see on the internet - you then said it was a highly automated process (giving the example of screenshots). I was then probing to see if you did also manually generate the information for each casino. I see you do so obviously it does give you the chance to check the casinos a little more closely. From your posts I'm sure you will and it sounds as though your directory could become very useful for players in the future.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2001
- Location
- London
So as it stands.
Those that have had a go at casinocity for advertising known rogues are trouble makers and poor agenda ridden souls who should be grateful?
Do pull the other one.
Hahaha.
Where Has The Original Mary Gone? Input and Data Needed.
Those that have had a go at casinocity for advertising known rogues are trouble makers and poor agenda ridden souls who should be grateful?
Do pull the other one.
Hahaha.
Where Has The Original Mary Gone? Input and Data Needed.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
Vesuvio:
Thank you for your comments on my last post.
1. I agree that we should spend some of our resources tracking down bad casinos, and I hope I have made it clear that we will do that. However, we're only human, so will certainly appreciate input from others where they think we might have missed one.
2. We do have people working on the directory with very different skill levels, so it does happen to be the case that there are challenges for us here. The vast majority of our content development work is done by college students working as interns. While this skill set works well calling up casinos and clarifying information, it doesn't work to call up or e-mail a casino to ask if they are trustworthy. We also happen to have particular challenges in this area over the next few weeks because we have to complete a number of print publications that that are our bread and butter before the G2E conference at the beginning of October (we cannot afford not to have those new products ready at that time,) and because the senior person who directs the student interns in on vacation for two weeks starting in a few days. I don't mean these to be excuses - we can and should do a good job here, but it does mean I'm a bit more constrained than would otherwise be the case over the very near term.
3. Just so everyone knows, while Casino City has been around for a very long time (originally launced in 1995, and I believe the original gaming portal website), until recently our web content was primarily focused on land-based casino gaming, where I believe we do provide really outstanding content. Our current online casino site was only launched about three months ago, however, so is still really in its very early infancy. Obviously the site need to grow up in areas such as identifying good and bad casinos, and that will happen. Originally, I did not think we would have the problems we are having here. We build Version 1 of the site based on popularity rankings of websites. I assumed that sites that were popular would prove to be reputable since I did not think it would be possible to have a rogue site with very high usage levels. When it became clear that this premise was false a few weeks ago, we started to have discussions about how to address this issue of high traffic ranks for disreputable casinos. That discussion resulted in a great deal of internal debate about how to properly address the issue, and some amount of internal controversy about what level of evidence should be required to consider a casino to be rogue. I think some of the internal controversy was correct because there are a lot of shades of grey here. However, we will definitely continue plugging away until we have a clear philosophy that makes sense, that is responsible, and that is as consistently applied as possible.
Thank you for your comments on my last post.
1. I agree that we should spend some of our resources tracking down bad casinos, and I hope I have made it clear that we will do that. However, we're only human, so will certainly appreciate input from others where they think we might have missed one.
2. We do have people working on the directory with very different skill levels, so it does happen to be the case that there are challenges for us here. The vast majority of our content development work is done by college students working as interns. While this skill set works well calling up casinos and clarifying information, it doesn't work to call up or e-mail a casino to ask if they are trustworthy. We also happen to have particular challenges in this area over the next few weeks because we have to complete a number of print publications that that are our bread and butter before the G2E conference at the beginning of October (we cannot afford not to have those new products ready at that time,) and because the senior person who directs the student interns in on vacation for two weeks starting in a few days. I don't mean these to be excuses - we can and should do a good job here, but it does mean I'm a bit more constrained than would otherwise be the case over the very near term.
3. Just so everyone knows, while Casino City has been around for a very long time (originally launced in 1995, and I believe the original gaming portal website), until recently our web content was primarily focused on land-based casino gaming, where I believe we do provide really outstanding content. Our current online casino site was only launched about three months ago, however, so is still really in its very early infancy. Obviously the site need to grow up in areas such as identifying good and bad casinos, and that will happen. Originally, I did not think we would have the problems we are having here. We build Version 1 of the site based on popularity rankings of websites. I assumed that sites that were popular would prove to be reputable since I did not think it would be possible to have a rogue site with very high usage levels. When it became clear that this premise was false a few weeks ago, we started to have discussions about how to address this issue of high traffic ranks for disreputable casinos. That discussion resulted in a great deal of internal debate about how to properly address the issue, and some amount of internal controversy about what level of evidence should be required to consider a casino to be rogue. I think some of the internal controversy was correct because there are a lot of shades of grey here. However, we will definitely continue plugging away until we have a clear philosophy that makes sense, that is responsible, and that is as consistently applied as possible.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
Amandajm:
Just to be clear, I don't mind at all people getting after us for not identifying rogue casinos earlier. I agree completely that we should be doing that, and hope that is clear to anyone who reads all of my posts on this thread. However, I would point out that I do not view listing casinos in the directory the same as advertising them. I don't think anyone would call our skull and crossbones treatment for windows casino an advertisement any more than they would say listing windows casino in the rogue casino section on the casinomeister website is advertising them.
Just to be clear, I don't mind at all people getting after us for not identifying rogue casinos earlier. I agree completely that we should be doing that, and hope that is clear to anyone who reads all of my posts on this thread. However, I would point out that I do not view listing casinos in the directory the same as advertising them. I don't think anyone would call our skull and crossbones treatment for windows casino an advertisement any more than they would say listing windows casino in the rogue casino section on the casinomeister website is advertising them.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
Just want to point out a couple of things
What may have initiated some of the furor over this whole listing thing is that perhaps there is a misunderstanding on the the difference between a portal that is an affiliate and a portal that is providing information as an directory. There are some major differences.
Affiliate sites are those that receive a cut in player losses - and some of these sites understandably come under fire when it's seems they are receiving a "cut" from roguish enterprises. These sites want you to play at these casinos (intent) because they gain from the profits they make bcause of this direct linking.
Directories gain profit from the ability to provide a wealth of information. Normally, they are not receiving profit from individual links (in most cases).
The problem is that directories may "direct" a player to a casino that is ethically challenged, simply because it is listed there. There really is no intent involved. Casino City is faces this challenge and hopefully they will serve as an example for other directories to follow.
I also want to point out the complexity of defining "rogue". Sometimes its quite easy: xyz casino makes untruthful and deceptive statements to players and does not act to correct this = rogue. xyz casino has cheating software = rogue. xyz casino fails to pay its players = rogue, are just some examples.
And then there is the degree of rogueness, (intensity, number of players affected, intent, ethics involved, etc.) weighed against how the casinos react to player rogue awareness". Some casinos remain aloof, some throw lawyers at you, some try to make amends.
You also need to be aware what your sources are when collecting information for any rogue section. Forums are problematic since many players use the forums as a means of blackmail so its extremely important to consider the source. Another way to collect rogue information is to deal directly with the casinos to assist players but this is demanding and sucks up a lot of time and resources. And then you can make investigations yourself.
I applaud Casino Citys efforts in weeding through the emotional outbursts and using the comments make here constructively; I will be assisting them in providing information for their skull and crossbones/delinking efforts.
As an endnote to this post, I really hope for the day when we can all be a bit more constructive and not so destructive. I tire of the unnecessary freaking out and negativity that in some threads is so predictable. These are bad vibes which are really stressing some of you out. Lets try not to let these bad vibes get the best of us, eh?
What may have initiated some of the furor over this whole listing thing is that perhaps there is a misunderstanding on the the difference between a portal that is an affiliate and a portal that is providing information as an directory. There are some major differences.
Affiliate sites are those that receive a cut in player losses - and some of these sites understandably come under fire when it's seems they are receiving a "cut" from roguish enterprises. These sites want you to play at these casinos (intent) because they gain from the profits they make bcause of this direct linking.
Directories gain profit from the ability to provide a wealth of information. Normally, they are not receiving profit from individual links (in most cases).
The problem is that directories may "direct" a player to a casino that is ethically challenged, simply because it is listed there. There really is no intent involved. Casino City is faces this challenge and hopefully they will serve as an example for other directories to follow.
I also want to point out the complexity of defining "rogue". Sometimes its quite easy: xyz casino makes untruthful and deceptive statements to players and does not act to correct this = rogue. xyz casino has cheating software = rogue. xyz casino fails to pay its players = rogue, are just some examples.
And then there is the degree of rogueness, (intensity, number of players affected, intent, ethics involved, etc.) weighed against how the casinos react to player rogue awareness". Some casinos remain aloof, some throw lawyers at you, some try to make amends.
You also need to be aware what your sources are when collecting information for any rogue section. Forums are problematic since many players use the forums as a means of blackmail so its extremely important to consider the source. Another way to collect rogue information is to deal directly with the casinos to assist players but this is demanding and sucks up a lot of time and resources. And then you can make investigations yourself.
I applaud Casino Citys efforts in weeding through the emotional outbursts and using the comments make here constructively; I will be assisting them in providing information for their skull and crossbones/delinking efforts.
As an endnote to this post, I really hope for the day when we can all be a bit more constructive and not so destructive. I tire of the unnecessary freaking out and negativity that in some threads is so predictable. These are bad vibes which are really stressing some of you out. Lets try not to let these bad vibes get the best of us, eh?
Last edited:
caruso said:
Caruso, where do you come off making these offensive allegations in this typically vitriolic and unsubstantiated manner. What "casino interests" are you claiming I have that subjugate my integrity to "The pursuit of the Almighty Dollar" you are so fond of ascribing to everyone that disagrees with you?
For years and despite occasional threats, my news service has posted cautions regarding known rogue behaviour in this industry, and challenged those operations beyond yelling on the fora. We may not accompany those cautions with your trademark histrionics, but we make the challenge objectively and without the shield of anonymity, and we produce evidence. Your specific comparison here of my cautions regarding Grand Banks with CC is totally erroneous - one has been ripping off players for years and has been repeatedly contacted by myself and others in protest, and the other (CC) is actually here making an attempt to right the wrongs on his site despite your unreasonable ranting and stamping. And btw I rarely go the huffing a puffing route you employ in your extreme posturing to "root out" evil.
I think that CC has probably given the lie to the rest of your diatribe, albeit in a considerably more reasonable and controlled presentation.
Vesuvio I have to congratulate you on responding to CC in a more civilised manner to pursue your debate with him. I think more can come from a combination of discussion and genuine intent than is achieved through hostility and ridicule.
It looks as if CC has addressed many of the points you have raised but one - your suggestion that I expect you to contact every portal out there. That is patently impractical for a player, but I do think that where you see (as in this case) obvious but unidentified rogues on a site where someone appears to be making an effort, a little help can benefit all concerned. As I said before - that is your choice.
Bryan...as usual, well said.
jetset said:
No, I'm not comparing GB and CC - one is a casino and one is a portal. I'm comparing your double-standard attitude between GB and the portals thereof, and the likes of Windows etc and the portal thereof - CasinoCity: on the one hand, Grand Banks are consistent slow-payers and have earned rogue status. They DO pay, just very slowly at their discretion. You have jumped on this bandwagon on MANY an occasion, castigating your "enemies" who carry them for their gall in representing and taking aff commission from this group of scumbags. NOW, on the other hand, 1) Windows has had a bad rep since the beginning, 2) Casino Bar is rigged (proven), 3) NetGaming is rigged (proven) and 4) Crystal Palace is run by the worst RTG operator out there. There are more yet - SEVERAL rogue operations represented by CasinoCity. Yet you turn a blind eye to this and "appaud" their recent legal action.
This is the clear double standard. If you are so vitriolic about a semi-rogue like Grand Banks, why are you suddenly so mousy-quiet and tolerant of portals carrying ABSOLUTE rogues like Crystal Palace, Casino Bar...etc etc? It seems utterly contradictory until one considers the motivation:
Not everyone, just yourself. Your business is the casino industry. You run a news service circulated to interested people involved in your industry on a subscription basis - $6000 per year I think. Without the casino industry you make no money. You make your money from the casino industry.
Did I REALLY need to explain that?
Bryan's points about directory / affiliate are understood and already made, but please look at the screenshot I posted. That is a Crystal Palace AFFILIATE banner on the Windows page. Whether or not the Windows click-through on the same page is an auto-generated non-affiliate based advert I don't know. But the Crystal Palace one, unrelated to Windows and clearly placed intentionally, can only be an AFFILIATE banner. Affiliate banners either generate advertising revenue, CPA or affiliate percentage commission.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
I just want to let everyone know that Bryan has graciously provided us with a list of 19 casinos that he believes deserve the skull and crossbones treatment on our site, and our plan is to accept that list as-is and have it fully implemented today. There is also an issue of how to handle casinos that fall more into a not recommended rather than rogue category, and my plan is that we will also do something on that front, but at a later date.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2001
- Location
- London
To mention the word Ecogra in a post that is not completely PRO Ecogra has become hard work for sure.
The rotten fruit brigade come out with allsorts of nasties throwing hard and fast heheh.
Hey Bryan. M.Craig told me on the OPA phoneline Casino City were putting together a complete list of online casinos about 2 years ago.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
casino city had an internet casino directory ~ not 3 months ago or whatever.- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
Amandajm:
Yes, we did have an old directory before, but it was buried on our site, had no relation to the new one, was impossible to use to find anything useful, and had virtually no visitor traffic, and was actually probably there for six years ir so. What changed is that we trashed the junk from before that had not been updated in years, and built a completely new site on online casinos from the group up, plus we actually began to feature our online casino directory on our site. That was around three months ago or so (might be four by now).
Yes, we did have an old directory before, but it was buried on our site, had no relation to the new one, was impossible to use to find anything useful, and had virtually no visitor traffic, and was actually probably there for six years ir so. What changed is that we trashed the junk from before that had not been updated in years, and built a completely new site on online casinos from the group up, plus we actually began to feature our online casino directory on our site. That was around three months ago or so (might be four by now).
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2001
- Location
- London
Okay sir, fair is fair. You will be highlighting the rogues and won't be pushing the bad firms, you will be taking advice from the Meister, then that's fine by me. That's more spotlight for the rogues and just how they don't like it. Welcome to the World of watching out for the bad guys.
Aside from that you got caught up in the Ecogra thing. Which is simply a few are not sold as to Ecogra's worth whereas others are.
You may have noticed those not sold on Ecogra and have stood by that opinion ~ have an "agenda". I have no agenda, i do not work for the opposition, whoever they are.
Those that think Ecogra are great stuff have an "opinion".
Peace.
Aside from that you got caught up in the Ecogra thing. Which is simply a few are not sold as to Ecogra's worth whereas others are.
You may have noticed those not sold on Ecogra and have stood by that opinion ~ have an "agenda". I have no agenda, i do not work for the opposition, whoever they are.
Those that think Ecogra are great stuff have an "opinion".
Peace.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2003
joeyl ,why u at go after half the gpwa back portols that promote crooked casinos, please go all out on your quest. this has nothing to do with u at all, this has something to do with being fair.
caruso said:
Glad to see you are now taking a sensible approach to CC's patient efforts with your discourtesy here, Caruso - it is long overdue.
QUOTE: Grand Banks are consistent slow-payers and have earned rogue status. They DO pay, just very slowly at their discretion. You have jumped on this bandwagon on MANY an occasion, castigating your "enemies" who carry them for their gall in representing and taking aff commission from this group of scumbags. NOW, on the other hand, 1) Windows have had a bad rep since the beginning, 2) Casino Bar is rigged (proven), 3) NetGaming is rigged (proven) and 4) Crystal Palace is run by the worst RTG operator out there. There are more yet - SEVERAL rogue operations represented by CasinoCity. Yet you turn a blind eye to this and "appaud" their recent legal action.
This is the clear double standard. If you are so vitriolic about a semi-rogue like Grand Banks, why are you suddenly so mousy-quiet and tolerant of portals carrying ABSOLUTE rogues like Crystal Palace, Casino Bar...etc etc? It seems utterly contradictory until one considers the motivation:UNQUOTE
You must be very seriously mis or perhaps uninformed - I have repeatedly criticised all the rogues you claim to have discovered here and will continue to do so. Some have tried to silence our criticisms, on several occasions by threats of violence or litigation. Unlike you, I have not confined my criticism to anonymous name-calling on the fora; I have contacted them openly and protested substantiated by evidence, tried to negotiate for stiffed players in some cases and exposed their activities through our bulletins. And we will do so again when cases come to our attention and are substantiated.
You cannot seriously be suggesting that your "semi-rogue" Grand Banks does not belong in the Rogues Gallery along with my other so-called "enemies" (strange that you keep using that expression - I don't have the time for that sort of 'enemies' trivia) And many others have been far more militant in "castigating" some of the portal owners with whom you communicate. But I guess you have to label something to ascribe negative motives to it.
Yes, I do applaud the CC legal challenge, as does every informed and thinking member of this industry. And no, I didn't attack CC the moment he pitched up because he was trying to rectify his faults. With which we are now happily assisting him after all the negativity and unpleasantness you have managed to again spread around.
QUOTE:Your business is the casino industry. You run a news service circulated to interested people involved in your industry on a subscription basis - $6000 per year I think. Without the casino industry you make no money. You make your money from the casino industry.UNQUOTE
Wrong again. This is hardly a "casino interest" as you originally implied. Part of my business is in the online gambling news industry, as is the case with many, many others across the industry who behave in an ethical and professional manner. I have interests in other industries too.
Operating a business in an industry does not presuppose that one's integrity is for sale, no matter how much you would like to believe and portray that in your posts. And don't try to act the detective with stuff like "You run a news service circulated to interested people involved in your industry on a subscription basis - $6000 per year I think." - I've made no secret of who I am and what I do, and I actually gave you that figure myself.
***************
"And don't try to act the detective with stuff like "You run a news service circulated to interested people involved in your industry on a subscription basis - $6000 per year I think." - I've made no secret of who I am and what I do, and I actually gave you that figure myself."
You most certainly did not. The figure I'm referring to came from a third party who recommended your service (a mutual acquaintance in fact), in the form of "$1500 per quarter". I took his word for it and did the maths myself. That didn't require any detective work. You have never mentioned to me, in private or anywhere else, the cost of Infopowa, to the very best of my recollection.
That you may or may not have voiced negative opinions about these various rogues in the past is not my point. My point is that you are quite happy to keep merrily schtum about CasinoCity's inclusion of the worst pondlife on the scene - and even praise his "courage" - whereas you are the first to jump on those portal owners you number amongst your enemies when their support for other rogues is dragged through the mud once more - see the most recent GPWA-bashing contest right here for your own contribution a while back...
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...um-or-contact-the-webmaster-to-get-paid.4607/ -
...where you said: "Further, I don't see why players should not hold accountable portals that steer them to bum casinos where they struggle to get paid. They should lay their troubles on the portalmaster, who discharges his or her accountability by solving the problem with the casino, or explaining to the player why it is not a fair complaint."
LOLOLOL and did I say LOL? It seems the same standards are not applied across the board, depending on where one's interests lie. Portals carrying Grand Banks must be accountable. Portals carrying Casino Bar and Crystal Palace aren't. Of course, it depends on who owns the portals. LOLOLOL.
"...after all the negativity and unpleasantness you have managed to again spread around..."
I call bullshit to task. That includes crooked operators, inefficient or corrupt portals, fake regulators and any other aspect of anti-player roguery I observe. None of any of this is either negative or unpleasant - except for the crooked, the inept and the fake.
So you wear whichever caps fits you best, Jet.
Let me say that the right moves seem to be being made with the CC portal now. They should never have needed to have been made in the first place because portals should DO THEIR RESEARCH BEFORE DECIDING WHICH CASINOS TO CARRY - but better late than never.
So, thanks to them for responding positively.
You most certainly did not. The figure I'm referring to came from a third party who recommended your service (a mutual acquaintance in fact), in the form of "$1500 per quarter". I took his word for it and did the maths myself. That didn't require any detective work. You have never mentioned to me, in private or anywhere else, the cost of Infopowa, to the very best of my recollection.
That you may or may not have voiced negative opinions about these various rogues in the past is not my point. My point is that you are quite happy to keep merrily schtum about CasinoCity's inclusion of the worst pondlife on the scene - and even praise his "courage" - whereas you are the first to jump on those portal owners you number amongst your enemies when their support for other rogues is dragged through the mud once more - see the most recent GPWA-bashing contest right here for your own contribution a while back...
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...um-or-contact-the-webmaster-to-get-paid.4607/ -
...where you said: "Further, I don't see why players should not hold accountable portals that steer them to bum casinos where they struggle to get paid. They should lay their troubles on the portalmaster, who discharges his or her accountability by solving the problem with the casino, or explaining to the player why it is not a fair complaint."
LOLOLOL and did I say LOL? It seems the same standards are not applied across the board, depending on where one's interests lie. Portals carrying Grand Banks must be accountable. Portals carrying Casino Bar and Crystal Palace aren't. Of course, it depends on who owns the portals. LOLOLOL.
"...after all the negativity and unpleasantness you have managed to again spread around..."
I call bullshit to task. That includes crooked operators, inefficient or corrupt portals, fake regulators and any other aspect of anti-player roguery I observe. None of any of this is either negative or unpleasant - except for the crooked, the inept and the fake.
So you wear whichever caps fits you best, Jet.
Let me say that the right moves seem to be being made with the CC portal now. They should never have needed to have been made in the first place because portals should DO THEIR RESEARCH BEFORE DECIDING WHICH CASINOS TO CARRY - but better late than never.
So, thanks to them for responding positively.
QUOTE: That didn't require any detective work. You have never mentioned to me, in private or anywhere else, the cost of Infopowa, to the very best of my recollection.UNQUOTE
I see you are still twisting the facts, unless your memory is short. Go back to yet another set of false accusations you made when we were wrangling over the Truegambler nonsense - I actually posted that information for you. In any event it is academic - we have no reason to hide our commercial news subscription rates to legitimate enquirers.
And I repeat, this service is hardly the "casino interests" you tried to imply I had.
QUOTE: ...where you said: "Further, I don't see why players should not hold accountable portals that steer them to bum casinos where they struggle to get paid. They should lay their troubles on the portalmaster, who discharges his or her accountability by solving the problem with the casino, or explaining to the player why it is not a fair complaint." UNQUOTE
I absolutely stand by that comment - but as usual you did not give this portalmaster a chance, in fact he was not even in the door before you started slamming and ridiculing him. I believe that portalmasters have an obligation to the player - but when one of them is trying to right faults your bombast is counter-productive and I will always encourage rather than blast out of hand. We have different approaches, and I abhor rampant arrogance and unprovoked discourtesy.
And after all that hot air, where are we? You're assisting the guy which is something you could have tried before immediately heading for the low road.
QUOTE: Portals carrying Grand Banks must be accountable. Portals carrying Casino Bar and Crystal Palace aren't. Of course, it depends on who owns the portals. UNQUOTE
What an extraordinary statement. Presumably this emanates from some of your "friends" who are apparently still my "enemies" - I see you are still leaning on that word LOL, and I can only repeat my last post that I do not have the time for this sort of immature trivia.
Coming from someone who confines his activities to name-calling on the message boards your comments lack credibility with me, I'm afraid. If everyone "jumped on the bandwagon" as you describe it every time a rogue name appeared we would all do little else and probably need a lot more bandwidth. Instead, many of us prefer to assemble the information in a credible manner before we initiate an action, which is certainly a fairer and more responsible approach because unlike you we actually do it upfront with our real identities there for the Internet to see.
These last few posts of yours have convinced me that you have little real idea of what goes on off these message boards where you try so hard to portray yourself as the gamblers' rather loud avenger LOL.
QUOTE I call bullshit to task.UNQUOTE
No, you don't. You activate typing fingers before brain fully in gear and in possession of all the facts. You posture endlessly, although I have to admit it is at times truly entertaining. But less amusing are the sweeping and inaccurate industry generalisations and mud-slinging that you indulge in without producing evidence. Your comments here concerning myself and my motives are a case in point. And then you try to reverse out of the situations this hasty judgmental attitude gets you in by invective and more accusations.
Having said that I acknowledge your interesting posts on the art and skill of gambling itself and the mathematics associated with it. More's the pity that you cannot seem to translate that level of thought to a more reasonable and fair assessment of other people in this industry who are trying to improve it.
Yes, I choose to pick a cap and wear it. It's the one for honest people regardless of what sector of online gambling they work or play in who are genuinely affronted by the bad elements of this industry and work to do something constructive to improve it.
I see you are still twisting the facts, unless your memory is short. Go back to yet another set of false accusations you made when we were wrangling over the Truegambler nonsense - I actually posted that information for you. In any event it is academic - we have no reason to hide our commercial news subscription rates to legitimate enquirers.
And I repeat, this service is hardly the "casino interests" you tried to imply I had.
QUOTE: ...where you said: "Further, I don't see why players should not hold accountable portals that steer them to bum casinos where they struggle to get paid. They should lay their troubles on the portalmaster, who discharges his or her accountability by solving the problem with the casino, or explaining to the player why it is not a fair complaint." UNQUOTE
I absolutely stand by that comment - but as usual you did not give this portalmaster a chance, in fact he was not even in the door before you started slamming and ridiculing him. I believe that portalmasters have an obligation to the player - but when one of them is trying to right faults your bombast is counter-productive and I will always encourage rather than blast out of hand. We have different approaches, and I abhor rampant arrogance and unprovoked discourtesy.
And after all that hot air, where are we? You're assisting the guy which is something you could have tried before immediately heading for the low road.
QUOTE: Portals carrying Grand Banks must be accountable. Portals carrying Casino Bar and Crystal Palace aren't. Of course, it depends on who owns the portals. UNQUOTE
What an extraordinary statement. Presumably this emanates from some of your "friends" who are apparently still my "enemies" - I see you are still leaning on that word LOL, and I can only repeat my last post that I do not have the time for this sort of immature trivia.
Coming from someone who confines his activities to name-calling on the message boards your comments lack credibility with me, I'm afraid. If everyone "jumped on the bandwagon" as you describe it every time a rogue name appeared we would all do little else and probably need a lot more bandwidth. Instead, many of us prefer to assemble the information in a credible manner before we initiate an action, which is certainly a fairer and more responsible approach because unlike you we actually do it upfront with our real identities there for the Internet to see.
These last few posts of yours have convinced me that you have little real idea of what goes on off these message boards where you try so hard to portray yourself as the gamblers' rather loud avenger LOL.
QUOTE I call bullshit to task.UNQUOTE
No, you don't. You activate typing fingers before brain fully in gear and in possession of all the facts. You posture endlessly, although I have to admit it is at times truly entertaining. But less amusing are the sweeping and inaccurate industry generalisations and mud-slinging that you indulge in without producing evidence. Your comments here concerning myself and my motives are a case in point. And then you try to reverse out of the situations this hasty judgmental attitude gets you in by invective and more accusations.
Having said that I acknowledge your interesting posts on the art and skill of gambling itself and the mathematics associated with it. More's the pity that you cannot seem to translate that level of thought to a more reasonable and fair assessment of other people in this industry who are trying to improve it.
Yes, I choose to pick a cap and wear it. It's the one for honest people regardless of what sector of online gambling they work or play in who are genuinely affronted by the bad elements of this industry and work to do something constructive to improve it.
What is your business? Your business is supplying casino information to the casino industry. Without the casino industry you have no business, so don't try and tell me you don't have interests in it. Your business is served by a free-flowing gambling dollar: more casinos, more news, more subscription. A six year old mental defective can see this - I doubt anyone here is having the wool pulled over their eyes by this shilly-shallying. Your stance here is hypocrisy absolute: until I brought this to the general attention of all here, you were quite happy to slap this individual on the back, praise his "courage" and quietly let slide the pile of junk residing in that directory. Now that I HAVE brought it to the spotlight, you continue to praise his efforts - now for responding to the criticism! NOTHING would have happened if I hadn't brought it out into the open - YOU would have continued billing and cooing at your free lunch-ticket without batting an eyelid at the crap he was promoting. You'd have happily let him carry on running with NetGaming, Casino Bar, Crystal Palace etc etc without a word - because you want his legal challenge to succeed, because you want the rewards for your business. Call the rogues when it suits. When it doesn't, shovel them under the carpet. All for your business dollar.
You are an absolute hypocrite.
My methods are abrasive and articlate: I call a spade a spade, a fake a fake, a rogue a rogue and a charlatan a charlatan, and I don't choose to pull punches. Whenever I see the kind of hypocrisy you revel in and the roguery you tacitly endorse, I call it. It works: look at the results here for the most recent example. ALL through MY efforts to expose the rubbish in that directory. MY efforts have led to the killing (it would seem) of that aff relationship with Crystal Palace that you tacitly endorsed through you blind-eye turning and the unfettered listing of a packet of clip-joints. Without my posting here, NONE of this would have happened.
So you can forget about your pathetic attempts to belittle my knowledge of the scene and the ropes within it. While I can continue successfully doing what I can to keep rogues, hypocrites and fakes honest, I will. While I can expose the dirt you try to shovel under the carpet when it suits you, I will. It works and it'll continue to work long after you've given up hoping it won't.
And excuse me for the little pat on the back I'm giving myself here for another job well done. Not finished, but at least got off to a good start.
You are a hypocrite. Hypocrites are not honest. Hypocrites are dishonest fakes.
You are an absolute hypocrite.
My methods are abrasive and articlate: I call a spade a spade, a fake a fake, a rogue a rogue and a charlatan a charlatan, and I don't choose to pull punches. Whenever I see the kind of hypocrisy you revel in and the roguery you tacitly endorse, I call it. It works: look at the results here for the most recent example. ALL through MY efforts to expose the rubbish in that directory. MY efforts have led to the killing (it would seem) of that aff relationship with Crystal Palace that you tacitly endorsed through you blind-eye turning and the unfettered listing of a packet of clip-joints. Without my posting here, NONE of this would have happened.
So you can forget about your pathetic attempts to belittle my knowledge of the scene and the ropes within it. While I can continue successfully doing what I can to keep rogues, hypocrites and fakes honest, I will. While I can expose the dirt you try to shovel under the carpet when it suits you, I will. It works and it'll continue to work long after you've given up hoping it won't.
And excuse me for the little pat on the back I'm giving myself here for another job well done. Not finished, but at least got off to a good start.
You are a hypocrite. Hypocrites are not honest. Hypocrites are dishonest fakes.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Location
- Heaven
Enough patting ones' self on the back.
Caruso has admitted being abrasive - that he is, as I often am. And these abrasive methods do sometimes work, no doubt about that.
Now that we've gotten that out of the way - there are times where being abrasive is detrimental, especially in new "relationships". Yes, I've fallen foul of this myself - I am known to the operators as a straight shooter and often abrasive - but this is something which usually happens after a relationship has been established and they are quite aware that I will continue to expose what I think are unfair practices.
In this case, however, we have no existing relationship - I doubt that Caruso has any inkling what Mike of Casino City has done in the industry - and though Caruso's intentions were good, in my mind they were probably a bit inappropriate and the issue could have been handled a lot better.
I do happen to know Mike - and I know he's not a bullshitter. Casino City has been around for a long time and they have the most comprehensive information on the gambling industry as far as directories go.
However, up until this point Casino City did not distinguish between operations - a casino was a casino, so to speak. Whereas Casinomeister and Got2Bet often make distinctions, Casino City did not because they were a directory - pure and simple.
Now Casino City does intend to make a different kind of impression and it is actively seeking to categorize online operations - can't be faulted for that, can it? In time they will get it right - make no mistake about it. Mike will not rest until he is satisfied with the result.
Can Caruso lay claim to getting the Crystal Palace "aff links" removed? Perhaps. But I bet that a simple word from myself or Casinomeister or Jetset would have achieved the same result. In other words, the abrasiveness was unnecessary.
Caruso is looking out for the players, really can't argue with that.
Jetset, on the other hand, is certainly not a hypocrite. He too is interested in making the industry better for players as well as operators - he has often assisted other players without any recompense as well - and he is actually a hell of a lot better at getting things done behind the scenes than I ever will be, though sometimes people mistakenly think that I wield a magic wand and when I wave it behind closed doors things happen. Jetset wields a bigger wand than I do... LOL...
If the two of you would set aside the bickering and perhaps have a civil discussion (hint hint - Vegas) - I bet the two of you would come away with a much better understanding of each other and together/individually make even more useful contributions to the industry.
In this case, however, I am definitely standing behind Mike and Jetset.
Caruso has admitted being abrasive - that he is, as I often am. And these abrasive methods do sometimes work, no doubt about that.
Now that we've gotten that out of the way - there are times where being abrasive is detrimental, especially in new "relationships". Yes, I've fallen foul of this myself - I am known to the operators as a straight shooter and often abrasive - but this is something which usually happens after a relationship has been established and they are quite aware that I will continue to expose what I think are unfair practices.
In this case, however, we have no existing relationship - I doubt that Caruso has any inkling what Mike of Casino City has done in the industry - and though Caruso's intentions were good, in my mind they were probably a bit inappropriate and the issue could have been handled a lot better.
I do happen to know Mike - and I know he's not a bullshitter. Casino City has been around for a long time and they have the most comprehensive information on the gambling industry as far as directories go.
However, up until this point Casino City did not distinguish between operations - a casino was a casino, so to speak. Whereas Casinomeister and Got2Bet often make distinctions, Casino City did not because they were a directory - pure and simple.
Now Casino City does intend to make a different kind of impression and it is actively seeking to categorize online operations - can't be faulted for that, can it? In time they will get it right - make no mistake about it. Mike will not rest until he is satisfied with the result.
Can Caruso lay claim to getting the Crystal Palace "aff links" removed? Perhaps. But I bet that a simple word from myself or Casinomeister or Jetset would have achieved the same result. In other words, the abrasiveness was unnecessary.
Caruso is looking out for the players, really can't argue with that.
Jetset, on the other hand, is certainly not a hypocrite. He too is interested in making the industry better for players as well as operators - he has often assisted other players without any recompense as well - and he is actually a hell of a lot better at getting things done behind the scenes than I ever will be, though sometimes people mistakenly think that I wield a magic wand and when I wave it behind closed doors things happen. Jetset wields a bigger wand than I do... LOL...
If the two of you would set aside the bickering and perhaps have a civil discussion (hint hint - Vegas) - I bet the two of you would come away with a much better understanding of each other and together/individually make even more useful contributions to the industry.
In this case, however, I am definitely standing behind Mike and Jetset.
Good Lord, Caruso - do you actually read this fallacious poison you keep posting or does it flow straight from your PC onto these pages? True to form, you have resorted to crude name-calling with scant regard for the facts and little if any substantiation.
This astonishing stream of insult and abuse is hardly worth answering, but let's look at your apparent assumption that everyone in this industry who is operating a business (or maybe even playing - after all you get reward for that occasionally too don't you?) is concerned only with the almighty dollar to the exclusion of player help and honesty.
Get real, man - there really is room for business and ethics together, and there are many, many people in this industry who do a damn sight more every week than you're ever likely to in order to really sort out the evils that do not permeate but certainly attend all sectors this industry.
Some of them right here (and I include myself) have foregone commercial reward from established crooks.
If this industry is as unredeemably and totally dirty as you repeatedly assert then whatever in the world are you doing participating in it? Because contrary to your own self-belief, you are not doing much to rectify it by your conduct here for starters.
You have somehow convinced yourself that your anonymous rants on what boards will still have you is the way to resolve the problems which beset the industry, when it is addressing but a small part of it. In fact, you yourself have become so consumed by your own importance that you are probably worsening some of the problems, particularly regarding the attitude of people you have prematurely fulminated against like CC.
Think about it - do you really believe that these extraordinary and anonymous performances of yours, which are not backed up or combined and followed through with any other activity are the sole cause of the truimph of good over evil here? It would seem so from your smug self-congratulation.
Do you ever bother to read the posts of others before strutting around trying to issue diktaats? Perhaps if you did you might have noticed that CC was already in contact with people like the 'Meister in sorting out his rogues. Much as you would like to have everyone believe it was your singlehanded efforts that achieved this momentous breakthrough it simply isn't so.
Take a look at your post above, which is staggering in its arrogance quite apart from its insulting content. I've heard of folks like you who take a pride in their lack of discipline and crude behaviour, excusing it as "calling a spade a spade" and it is fortunate that it is a comparatively rare occurrence.
QUOTE YOU would have continued billing and cooing at your free lunch-ticket without batting an eyelid at the crap he was promoting.UNQUOTE
What free lunch ticket would that be, pray? Are you now accusing me of selling my soul to this CC poster? I would like to see the proof if this is so because it is certainly news to me. And common courtesy in recognising an honest effort to resolve problems does not constitute "billing and cooing" in any term of reference.
You also seem to be mesmerised by the names Crystal Palace, Warren Cloud, Netgaming and Casino Bar, all of which (and a lot of other rogues too) have appeared negatively in our bulletins (you do read our bulletins, I take it?) and will continue to do so as cases come to light. Your trashing and crashing about was enough for the whole message board in this instance, and it was quite unnecessary.
QUOTE My methods are abrasive and articlate UNQUOTE
No, in this case they are precipitate, ill-founded, undisciplined, largely inaccurate and inexcusably insulting and abusive. The proof is right here on this thread. To take pride in this sort of public behaviour is beyond understanding for me.
Your continued opposition and ill-will to the legal action against the DoJ still mystifies me - why do you think it would be a good thing if CC loses the case and the DoJ has the imprimatur to interfere with a basic Constitutional right to freedom of speech and advertising.
Do you think this would be good for the gambling interest of thousands of players to have their right to information and choice truncated? Have you convinced yourself that the industry is so rotten that it is best hamstrung by this sort of questionable governmental interference? What do you think the implications of a DoJ victory might be for other areas of society should the politicians decide to attack them, too?
Fortunately, and contrary to your own seemingly ill-thought out opinion, the press is reporting today that many leading legal minds are already predicting that CC has a very strong case btw.
This astonishing stream of insult and abuse is hardly worth answering, but let's look at your apparent assumption that everyone in this industry who is operating a business (or maybe even playing - after all you get reward for that occasionally too don't you?) is concerned only with the almighty dollar to the exclusion of player help and honesty.
Get real, man - there really is room for business and ethics together, and there are many, many people in this industry who do a damn sight more every week than you're ever likely to in order to really sort out the evils that do not permeate but certainly attend all sectors this industry.
Some of them right here (and I include myself) have foregone commercial reward from established crooks.
If this industry is as unredeemably and totally dirty as you repeatedly assert then whatever in the world are you doing participating in it? Because contrary to your own self-belief, you are not doing much to rectify it by your conduct here for starters.
You have somehow convinced yourself that your anonymous rants on what boards will still have you is the way to resolve the problems which beset the industry, when it is addressing but a small part of it. In fact, you yourself have become so consumed by your own importance that you are probably worsening some of the problems, particularly regarding the attitude of people you have prematurely fulminated against like CC.
Think about it - do you really believe that these extraordinary and anonymous performances of yours, which are not backed up or combined and followed through with any other activity are the sole cause of the truimph of good over evil here? It would seem so from your smug self-congratulation.
Do you ever bother to read the posts of others before strutting around trying to issue diktaats? Perhaps if you did you might have noticed that CC was already in contact with people like the 'Meister in sorting out his rogues. Much as you would like to have everyone believe it was your singlehanded efforts that achieved this momentous breakthrough it simply isn't so.
Take a look at your post above, which is staggering in its arrogance quite apart from its insulting content. I've heard of folks like you who take a pride in their lack of discipline and crude behaviour, excusing it as "calling a spade a spade" and it is fortunate that it is a comparatively rare occurrence.
QUOTE YOU would have continued billing and cooing at your free lunch-ticket without batting an eyelid at the crap he was promoting.UNQUOTE
What free lunch ticket would that be, pray? Are you now accusing me of selling my soul to this CC poster? I would like to see the proof if this is so because it is certainly news to me. And common courtesy in recognising an honest effort to resolve problems does not constitute "billing and cooing" in any term of reference.
You also seem to be mesmerised by the names Crystal Palace, Warren Cloud, Netgaming and Casino Bar, all of which (and a lot of other rogues too) have appeared negatively in our bulletins (you do read our bulletins, I take it?) and will continue to do so as cases come to light. Your trashing and crashing about was enough for the whole message board in this instance, and it was quite unnecessary.
QUOTE My methods are abrasive and articlate UNQUOTE
No, in this case they are precipitate, ill-founded, undisciplined, largely inaccurate and inexcusably insulting and abusive. The proof is right here on this thread. To take pride in this sort of public behaviour is beyond understanding for me.
Your continued opposition and ill-will to the legal action against the DoJ still mystifies me - why do you think it would be a good thing if CC loses the case and the DoJ has the imprimatur to interfere with a basic Constitutional right to freedom of speech and advertising.
Do you think this would be good for the gambling interest of thousands of players to have their right to information and choice truncated? Have you convinced yourself that the industry is so rotten that it is best hamstrung by this sort of questionable governmental interference? What do you think the implications of a DoJ victory might be for other areas of society should the politicians decide to attack them, too?
Fortunately, and contrary to your own seemingly ill-thought out opinion, the press is reporting today that many leading legal minds are already predicting that CC has a very strong case btw.
Spearmaster says "Caruso has admitted being abrasive - that he is, as I often am. And these abrasive methods do sometimes work, no doubt about that."
The difference, Spear is that you do a lot more upfront and off the boards in addition, and in a balanced and substantiated manner than Caruso does with his often precipitous and inaccurate rants here.
The difference, Spear is that you do a lot more upfront and off the boards in addition, and in a balanced and substantiated manner than Caruso does with his often precipitous and inaccurate rants here.
Thank you to G2B for that post - we've had our own moments on more than one occasion so it's appreciated extra for that. I've made my points on the matters I've raised regarding Jetset's stance and I'll pursue them no further here: it'd be quite pointless, I can add nothing to them and cannot clarify any further - and one of us has to concede the last word. Conceded.
I'll stick in some more thoughts on the directory anon, should anything have been missed.
I'll stick in some more thoughts on the directory anon, should anything have been missed.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2003
jetset , i dont know why u take something so personal, caruso has been up front for years.
dont matter if it a directory or crack house, u promote bad casinos you need to be rebuke no matter if u doing good in other areas.
Players have to look out of are self, casino city main reason in going agaist the govement so they can make more money, which i dont blame them.
dont matter if it a directory or crack house, u promote bad casinos you need to be rebuke no matter if u doing good in other areas.
Players have to look out of are self, casino city main reason in going agaist the govement so they can make more money, which i dont blame them.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
Okay I'm stepping in and taking the ball away.
I don't want to see any more insults. This discussion has gotten heated enough - and enough is enough. Further comments like this should be confined to either PMing each other or via private emails.
I am siding with Spear on this one. I've known Michael for a number of years, and the issue of having links to problematic casinos was indeed something that was being addressed. As I mentioned before, being abrasive/over emotional/ etc. was unnecessary.
The bottom line is that most people here want this industry to be a safe one for the player. Let's not lose sight of this by letting personal issues get in the way.
caruso said:
I don't want to see any more insults. This discussion has gotten heated enough - and enough is enough. Further comments like this should be confined to either PMing each other or via private emails.
I am siding with Spear on this one. I've known Michael for a number of years, and the issue of having links to problematic casinos was indeed something that was being addressed. As I mentioned before, being abrasive/over emotional/ etc. was unnecessary.
The bottom line is that most people here want this industry to be a safe one for the player. Let's not lose sight of this by letting personal issues get in the way.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Location
- Heaven
:machinegu Just when I was getting warmed up...
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2001
- Location
- London
Too many argues? Remember, it takes 2 to tango.
I am a nobody but have this right. If I worked for Ecogra they would not be linking arms with a firm that has so many rogues on it.
If I worked for Casino City they would not have acredited such firms with the Ecogra standard.
The next time Ecogra join up with a firm I think they should take this as a lesson and actually take a look around the site right?
The work done behind the scenes has not been so great in this instance. Quite a farce actually if the truth be told.
Old / Expired Link
Much obliged for all of your time.
I am a nobody but have this right. If I worked for Ecogra they would not be linking arms with a firm that has so many rogues on it.
If I worked for Casino City they would not have acredited such firms with the Ecogra standard.
The next time Ecogra join up with a firm I think they should take this as a lesson and actually take a look around the site right?
The work done behind the scenes has not been so great in this instance. Quite a farce actually if the truth be told.
Old / Expired Link
Much obliged for all of your time.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Location
- Heaven
Joey -
eCOGRA will never enter into something lightly. They joined up with Casino City because they both have common goals.
Let's say one of your friends or family makes a mistake which appeared foolish but was clearly not intentional. Would you never speak to them again?
eCOGRA will never enter into something lightly. They joined up with Casino City because they both have common goals.
Let's say one of your friends or family makes a mistake which appeared foolish but was clearly not intentional. Would you never speak to them again?
Bethug: "i dont know why u take something so personal" Did you read the posts in this thread - that wasn't personal? What would you have done, let it go?
And these unsubstantiated personal attacks are now dismissed as "I can add nothing to them and cannot clarify any further"? I respect the Meister's right to put a stop to this scrap which must be boring the hell out of most of his members, but that sort of ending does not leave me feeling in the slightest bit conciliatory.
Meister: "The bottom line is that most people here want this industry to be a safe one for the player." That is a sensible and valid comment, although I am sure there will always be major differences on how it is best achieved and by whom.
There can never be a single individual who is always right or who can claim sole credit for bringing things about, because it takes many different activities and styles to bring about real improvements in the way players are treated, resolving issues, changing unfair policies and hammering away at the rogues.
What is needed is more tolerance and the realisation that others are also working on issues albeit with a different and lower profile way of going about it. Many others.
And these unsubstantiated personal attacks are now dismissed as "I can add nothing to them and cannot clarify any further"? I respect the Meister's right to put a stop to this scrap which must be boring the hell out of most of his members, but that sort of ending does not leave me feeling in the slightest bit conciliatory.
Meister: "The bottom line is that most people here want this industry to be a safe one for the player." That is a sensible and valid comment, although I am sure there will always be major differences on how it is best achieved and by whom.
There can never be a single individual who is always right or who can claim sole credit for bringing things about, because it takes many different activities and styles to bring about real improvements in the way players are treated, resolving issues, changing unfair policies and hammering away at the rogues.
What is needed is more tolerance and the realisation that others are also working on issues albeit with a different and lower profile way of going about it. Many others.
casinomeister said:
Mine, right? Jetset can just carry on, correct? Check out this lot:
Jetset said:
You think I should take this, Bryan? Pretty fine list of insults, wouldn't you say? But "you are a hypocrite is NOT acceptable, from me?
I've made clear points about 1) my problems with CC - which ARE now being addressed, and 2) the attitude displayed here which to my mind reeks of hypocrisy. I will NOT reiterate those points made, and I respect your right to put an end to what descended into a cat-fight - but NOT if I am continually provoked liked this. It's either both of us or neither of us - unless you tell me otherwise.
I stand by both my above arguments and ANY rational person reading them would agree on BOTH points. Repeat: but I am NOT about to continually regurgitate the. They are as stated.
G2B - Joey wasn't having a go at CasinoCity, he was pointing out that Ecogra might have done a bit of research on the website in question before getting hooked up with them. Evidently, they did not.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
Caruso et al:
I think you will be interested and pleased to see one of the benefits of Windows casino being included in our directory. I believe I can safely say (to the extent anything is "safe" to say here
) that we share a common objective of trying to prevent innocent players from being ripped off by a rogue like Windows Casino. Thus I thought it would be worthwhile to show what actually happens through inclusion in our directory.
One thing we are very good at is search engine interaction. I have attached to this post an image of the current results I got back from google when I searched for "windows casino". You will see that the Online Casino City page for this casino is the second out of 1,650,000 results.
Currently, if you follow the link from this page to our site, you get taken to our new page for windows casino, Link Removed (invalid URL),with the skull and crossbones :axeman2: . The result is that some newbie looking for Windows Casino on google will be reasonably likely to find our listing and be warned rather than just being bombarded by sites promoting it to earn affiliate revenue.
And it gets better. We are going to make modifications to the text that will be displayed by the search engines so it is clear from the description displayed in the search results that there is a problem with Windows Casino. It will take a little while for google and others to pick that up, but they will.
I think you will be interested and pleased to see one of the benefits of Windows casino being included in our directory. I believe I can safely say (to the extent anything is "safe" to say here
) that we share a common objective of trying to prevent innocent players from being ripped off by a rogue like Windows Casino. Thus I thought it would be worthwhile to show what actually happens through inclusion in our directory. One thing we are very good at is search engine interaction. I have attached to this post an image of the current results I got back from google when I searched for "windows casino". You will see that the Online Casino City page for this casino is the second out of 1,650,000 results.
Currently, if you follow the link from this page to our site, you get taken to our new page for windows casino, Link Removed (invalid URL),with the skull and crossbones :axeman2: . The result is that some newbie looking for Windows Casino on google will be reasonably likely to find our listing and be warned rather than just being bombarded by sites promoting it to earn affiliate revenue.
And it gets better. We are going to make modifications to the text that will be displayed by the search engines so it is clear from the description displayed in the search results that there is a problem with Windows Casino. It will take a little while for google and others to pick that up, but they will.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2004
- Location
- Newton, Massachusetts
Chucho:
There are currently about 30 skulls and crossbones up. You can see the current list at Link Removed (invalid URL).
We are going through a process of working with Bryan to develop a consistent list of rogue casinos for our initial pass at this. Over time, we will, of course, develop our own strategy for helping to progress this whole area, since it is our objective to do what we can to help.
One example of a casino we are currently tracking down with Bryan is Netgaming. Currently on the casinomeister website, the page covering netgaming is www.casinomeister.com/rogue/net-gaming-casino.html. If you look at this page it says:
The url net-gaming-casino.com is a dead link, and the rogue page on the casinomeister site specifically says it should not be confused with netgaming.com, so we are communicating with Bryan to resolve the issue here. My current belief is that netgaming.com is properly marked as a rogue casino, but yesterday I sent a message to Bryan asking for clarification here. I don't want to mark it as rogue until I get a response from Bryan to my question, and of course, he will want to update the casinomeister site as well to be consistent with our discussions.
I hope that example illustrates the nature of what is happening behind the scenes, and why it is not just a five minute job for even a very bright 3 year old.
There are currently about 30 skulls and crossbones up. You can see the current list at Link Removed (invalid URL).
We are going through a process of working with Bryan to develop a consistent list of rogue casinos for our initial pass at this. Over time, we will, of course, develop our own strategy for helping to progress this whole area, since it is our objective to do what we can to help.
One example of a casino we are currently tracking down with Bryan is Netgaming. Currently on the casinomeister website, the page covering netgaming is www.casinomeister.com/rogue/net-gaming-casino.html. If you look at this page it says:
The url net-gaming-casino.com is a dead link, and the rogue page on the casinomeister site specifically says it should not be confused with netgaming.com, so we are communicating with Bryan to resolve the issue here. My current belief is that netgaming.com is properly marked as a rogue casino, but yesterday I sent a message to Bryan asking for clarification here. I don't want to mark it as rogue until I get a response from Bryan to my question, and of course, he will want to update the casinomeister site as well to be consistent with our discussions.
I hope that example illustrates the nature of what is happening behind the scenes, and why it is not just a five minute job for even a very bright 3 year old.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2001
- Location
- London
spearmaster said:
Of course G2B, i speak to you don't I? Have not always seen eye to eye with you either.
Casinocity. It is quite safe to post on the boards fella.
Now, let's have another thing right.
### The Meister is tougher on those that he thinks have erred than I were on you.
### Got2Bet is tougher on those he thinks have erred than I were on you.
### Jetset is tougher on those he thinks have erred than I were on you.
### You are now being tougher on Windows than I were with you. (and rightfully so, good for you and all players)
Those are facts as I see them and anyone calling me names or whatever over my perception of the way things are will get asked what is their game. Those questioning my view as to what is fact without questioning my motives and indeed calling the facts as they see them will end up with a conversation, not an arguement.
Good luck with the case, hopefully you won't need it.
Cheers.
Last edited:
Casino City said:
Fair enough, but I feel it is a bit of a no brainer when it comes to casinos such as Netgaming and Crystal palace. I can only speculate what Bryan would say but I think it would go something like this. Bryan, shoud we add a skull and cross bones to Crystal Palace?......Bryan replies, please don't waste my time with such obvious questions. If you are not going to add a skull and cross bones to Crystal Palace, should not add them at all and while at the same time I can appreciate you wanting to be careful and not wrongly mark a casino, some of these casinos don't require any more though, it is clear as day and they should have been marked the 1st day you started marking. Every casino operated by Oliver Curran should be marked right away, and if anyone disagrees with that I would love to hear it.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2003
- Location
- The Boonies
Chucho,
obviously Michael has not been spending hours every day for the last couple of years reading player boards.
He is willing and even eager to conform to player wishes and that is a very big plus. He is working with Bryan and I am sure that will be perfectly satisfactory to all when finished.
He is also doing his best to save the strongholds for players in this industry - because if the US government succeeds in pushing all or most of the privately operated portals out of business, you will have casino operated portals. Already this is a HUGE trend!
You can bet your bejeezus that they will not give a hoot about anything but chanelling players to their own casinos. You as a seasoned player will still be ok, but new players will fall prey to casinos with no recourse and no one to mediate for them. It will be a free for all for the bad casino groups.
What Michael is doing for this industry and for players is extremely important and to be highly commended and supported.
And with a portal of such high search engine visibility, as Michael points out, to be marking rogues clearly is a huge advantage for novice players.
Yeah yeah, I am always carrying on about novice players, but they are who really need good guidance.
obviously Michael has not been spending hours every day for the last couple of years reading player boards.
He is willing and even eager to conform to player wishes and that is a very big plus. He is working with Bryan and I am sure that will be perfectly satisfactory to all when finished.
He is also doing his best to save the strongholds for players in this industry - because if the US government succeeds in pushing all or most of the privately operated portals out of business, you will have casino operated portals. Already this is a HUGE trend!
You can bet your bejeezus that they will not give a hoot about anything but chanelling players to their own casinos. You as a seasoned player will still be ok, but new players will fall prey to casinos with no recourse and no one to mediate for them. It will be a free for all for the bad casino groups.
What Michael is doing for this industry and for players is extremely important and to be highly commended and supported.
And with a portal of such high search engine visibility, as Michael points out, to be marking rogues clearly is a huge advantage for novice players.
Yeah yeah, I am always carrying on about novice players, but they are who really need good guidance.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2004
- Location
- EU|FI
amandajm said:
Ok, now i get it (your link). However, i check their site few days ago, and there was some mistakes (>>Only Show Sites With Language: Finnish). But after i sent my feedback, with correct details, they fix immediatly all mistakes, and respond my feedback. So my opinion about CC:
Ok, there is (most popular online casino)
1.Ladbrokes Casino
2.America Casinos
3-5 removed
I ask about America Casinos, because i don't know any Finnish people, who play there, but they give information, where they get details. Fair enough.
Some portals/webmasters don't care %#& about your feedback.
But CC answer (fast).
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Location
- Heaven
eCOGRA, you can rest assured, doesn't just enter into arrangements. I guarantee you that they will not enter into an arrangement with Got2Bet just because I ask.
As I said before - a lot of stuff goes on behind the scenes. I am fully confident that both parties researched each other before entering into an agreement.
Joey - I take it you get my point, then. CC made a mistake - but I would hardly put them before the firing squad.
You'll just have to take my word for it (however good or bad that is) that I am reasonably well acquainted with both eCOGRA and Casino City and their activities.
dominique said:
I agree, the novice players need advice an like you said, with a portal of such high search engine visibility a lot of new players will find themselves at CC. Anyway, I would like to nominate the following casinos for the skull and cross bones.
Crystal Palace
High Rollers Lounge
My Online Casino
Cleopatra
Americas Online
ClubMardiGras
Club Regal
Vegas Riches
Lucky Coin Casino
American Grand Casino
Golden Comps Casino
Lucky Pyramid Casino
Royal Circus Casino
Winners Playground
Can I also nominate Neteller for doing business with these crooks even though they are not a casino?
Nice one, Casino City.
I found your apparent neophite level of online casino nouse frustrating, and inappropriate in the circumstances. You've done quite a lot to rectify that, and willingly. My annoyance was primarily caused by others ' attitudes subsequently displayed, not personally towards yourself. That directory should never have been in that state in the first place, but thank you for making inroads into sorting it out. WTG.
I found your apparent neophite level of online casino nouse frustrating, and inappropriate in the circumstances. You've done quite a lot to rectify that, and willingly. My annoyance was primarily caused by others ' attitudes subsequently displayed, not personally towards yourself. That directory should never have been in that state in the first place, but thank you for making inroads into sorting it out. WTG.
Bryan...
The debate in this thread has been HEALTHY for this forum and for the online casino industry as a whole. It has brought to light numerous issues which need to be addressed by casinos, portals and players.
Caruso and Jetset will never see eye to eye on various issues.
But both parties are extremely well informed.
Both parties have certain vested interests.
Neither party has been overly abusive.
The debate has been EXTREMELY entertaining.
As forum moderator, I hope you will be extremely tolerant of free speech even if your views are diametrically opposed to that of Caruso.
Winneronline stepped over the line when they censored Caruso, and I encourge you not to follow in thier footsteps.
Although I have read personal attacks from BOTH parties, the converation from BOTH parties contains a lot of substance.
The debate between Jetset and Caruso has not turned into a flame war YET.
Bryan -- I encourage you to tolerate the free and open exchange of ideas and information.
The debate in this thread has been HEALTHY for this forum and for the online casino industry as a whole. It has brought to light numerous issues which need to be addressed by casinos, portals and players.
Caruso and Jetset will never see eye to eye on various issues.
But both parties are extremely well informed.
Both parties have certain vested interests.
Neither party has been overly abusive.
The debate has been EXTREMELY entertaining.
As forum moderator, I hope you will be extremely tolerant of free speech even if your views are diametrically opposed to that of Caruso.
Winneronline stepped over the line when they censored Caruso, and I encourge you not to follow in thier footsteps.
Although I have read personal attacks from BOTH parties, the converation from BOTH parties contains a lot of substance.
The debate between Jetset and Caruso has not turned into a flame war YET.
Bryan -- I encourage you to tolerate the free and open exchange of ideas and information.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Location
- Heaven
Not so sure I agree with the bit about vested interests, Dave, but I definitely do agree that both parties have a wealth of info.
Caruso's "vested interest" is that he's a player. Nothing wrong with that.
Jetset's "vested interest" is that he provides news. Nothing wrong with that either.
What if this had taken place on my forums?
I probably would have let it go with a strong warning regarding abusiveness. But I am otherwise a dictator there. Spam my board about Brandy and you're instantly gone. Spam for anything else and you'll discover soon enough that another misstep will condemn you to the bleachers. But something like this I probably would be rubbing my hands with glee... LOL... as long as it doesn't overstep the bounds of decency and a fair opportunity to spout is given to both sides.
Ah well, I can dream on... LOL...
Caruso's "vested interest" is that he's a player. Nothing wrong with that.
Jetset's "vested interest" is that he provides news. Nothing wrong with that either.
What if this had taken place on my forums?
I probably would have let it go with a strong warning regarding abusiveness. But I am otherwise a dictator there. Spam my board about Brandy and you're instantly gone. Spam for anything else and you'll discover soon enough that another misstep will condemn you to the bleachers. But something like this I probably would be rubbing my hands with glee... LOL... as long as it doesn't overstep the bounds of decency and a fair opportunity to spout is given to both sides.
Ah well, I can dream on... LOL...
snuf419 said:
CC still has banners for Crystal Palace
I give up 
Trying to get CC to change will probably be as hard as getting paid by Crystal Palace. Assuming what you say is true, that CC still has Crystal Palace banners on it's site, then they are as bad as the operators of Crystal Palace and should not get credit for anything. That is great that they are taking steps to differentiate the good casinos on their list from the bad ones, but as long as they accept money from criminal organizations such as Crystal Palace, they should be treated as criminals.Here is a start for CC, 1st remove all banners for bad casinos, Crystal Palace and its equivalents. The next step would be to do the skull and cross bones in the directory as to me their is a big difference between simply having a directory with some bad casinos in it and actually having banner adds promoting them.
CC, accept my apologies if you do not have banners for Crystal Palace, but if you do, you do not have a leg to stand on and you should put a big skull and cross bones on your homepage warning visitors not to play at the casinos you promote.
