Casino review site promoting rogue casinos

[ericodapro]

I posted some concerns I found on another casino review site Which Ill post below and the reply I got from one of the moderators was even more concerning to me. I would like to know YOUR thoughts on the moderators reply.
(I will remove the name of the review site but I have no problem disclosing which one if you want to know)

My post as follows:

"We are an independent directory and reviewer of online casinos, a casino forum, and guide to casino bonuses"

The statement above is what **** claims to be, and at first, it seemed accurate to me. However, after spending considerable time exploring the site, I’ve come across several issues that raise concerns. For instance, I found a casino review that made false claims, stating the casino was licensed and certified for fairness. But upon checking, I discovered the casino wasn’t licensed, and none of their slots were included in the fairness certification.

Another red flag appeared when I looked at the list of casinos with the "**** Seal of Approval." I randomly selected one and asked about their licensing details through the casino's live chat. The representative refused to provide any information on their licensing. It’s troubling to think that a casino that refuses to disclose its licensing could be on an "**** Seal of Approval" list.

The fact that these were the first two casinos I chose to research and both raised significant concerns makes me question **** and its reputation. When I brought this up in a separate thread here, I was ignored by the moderators, which only added to my doubts.
I highly encourage players to do your own research when looking for a casino to play at and how nice would it be to find a honest casino review site that wasn't based on referral bonuses.
Too many casinos getting a bad rap.... Here is an idea, lets not promote bad casinos! It seems to me that **** is only adding to this problem! If you want a better gaming experience you NEED to stop promoting bad casinos.

Casino review sites reply........ (keep in mind these were casinos on their "seal of approval" list.)

"Our goal is to ensure that players are fully informed, which is why we include both good and bad casinos. We intentionally add casinos with poor reputations to warn players about them. This is exactly why such casinos are on our list – so players know what to expect."

Hmmm... so they add bad casinos on their "seal of approval" list so that players will know what to expect. what a brilliant way to promote online gaming and build trust for new players! Am I wrong?

 

[conker]

There are possibly thousands of 'casino review sites' that do not provide genuine information or are 'incentivised' by money, rather than honesty. It is part of the reason that the traditional affiliate site from the past twenty years has fallen out of favour with Google, and many of these sites have seen their rankings drop accordingly.

You have not mentioned the site in question and I don't encourage you to do so. What I would encourage you to do is not waste any more time there if you can help it. The owners/moderators of that site will likely back themselves to the hills all day long, so you will not get very far with them when challenging the way they do things - that's been my general experience.

 

[maxd]

Are you asking the forum readership or are you asking us Casinomeister people? I don’t want to skew the conversation where it’s not been asked for.

That said, I think conker has nailed it: you’ve seen that the site does not uphold a standard you can respect. Very much sounds like time to move on. IMHO.

- Max

 

[ericodapro]

There are possibly thousands of 'casino review sites' that do not provide genuine information or are 'incentivised' by money, rather than honesty. It is part of the reason that the traditional affiliate site from the past twenty years has fallen out of favour with Google, and many of these sites have seen their rankings drop accordingly.

You have not mentioned the site in question and I don't encourage you to do so. What I would encourage you to do is not waste any more time there if you can help it. The owners/moderators of that site will like back themselves to the hills all day long, so you will not get very far with them when challenging the way they do things - that's been my general experience.

You nailed it on the head, the mods reply was "liked" by 8 other mods. My post ....zero likes.

 

[conker]

You nailed it on the head, the mods reply was "liked" by 8 other mods. My post ....zero likes.

Sounds about right

 

[ericodapro]

I was asking for anyones thoughts who read this, Im not picky. What I'm really trying to glean from this is, is this a common practice for casino review sites? But conker already touched on that.

 

[pereblue]

Dear @ericodapro, we have a subforum where you can report inaccurate information, our site is huge and we are still in the process of updating the Casino Reviews, so feel free to report here:
Casino Reviews Updates - Casinomeister's Forum: Largest Online Casino Community Since 1998

Greetings!

 

[dunover]

I posted some concerns I found on another casino review site Which Ill post below and the reply I got from one of the moderators was even more concerning to me. I would like to know YOUR thoughts on the moderators reply.
(I will remove the name of the review site but I have no problem disclosing which one if you want to know)

My post as follows:

"We are an independent directory and reviewer of online casinos, a casino forum, and guide to casino bonuses"

The statement above is what **** claims to be, and at first, it seemed accurate to me. However, after spending considerable time exploring the site, I’ve come across several issues that raise concerns. For instance, I found a casino review that made false claims, stating the casino was licensed and certified for fairness. But upon checking, I discovered the casino wasn’t licensed, and none of their slots were included in the fairness certification.

Another red flag appeared when I looked at the list of casinos with the "**** Seal of Approval." I randomly selected one and asked about their licensing details through the casino's live chat. The representative refused to provide any information on their licensing. It’s troubling to think that a casino that refuses to disclose its licensing could be on an "**** Seal of Approval" list.

The fact that these were the first two casinos I chose to research and both raised significant concerns makes me question **** and its reputation. When I brought this up in a separate thread here, I was ignored by the moderators, which only added to my doubts.
I highly encourage players to do your own research when looking for a casino to play at and how nice would it be to find a honest casino review site that wasn't based on referral bonuses.
Too many casinos getting a bad rap.... Here is an idea, lets not promote bad casinos! It seems to me that **** is only adding to this problem! If you want a better gaming experience you NEED to stop promoting bad casinos.

Casino review sites reply........ (keep in mind these were casinos on their "seal of approval" list.)

"Our goal is to ensure that players are fully informed, which is why we include both good and bad casinos. We intentionally add casinos with poor reputations to warn players about them. This is exactly why such casinos are on our list – so players know what to expect."

Hmmm... so they add bad casinos on their "seal of approval" list so that players will know what to expect. what a brilliant way to promote online gaming and build trust for new players! Am I wrong?

There are many review sites that are downright fraudulent, some even operated by owners of the bent casinos being promoted. It's a minefield. They rely on viewer ignorance and people like yourself who investigate the bogus licensing information for example will be disregarded.

Even offering player arbitration services can be a disguise because unlike here for example, where a listed casino must provide interaction and cooperation in the event of disputes, you may find they are simply a no-hope charade to maintain the cloak of respectability.

You will also find arbitrary and prejudicial terms in many which effectively make it hard NOT to break a rule and be deprived of any winnings. That's even before we get onto pirated games and dodgy payment processors.

As said in posts up above, this is of little concern to the promoters because once one site is trashed, the operators will collect the money and rebirth it with a different appearance to keep it healthy for a period before negative SEO gets it, rinse and repeat.

It's nice to see someone doing their homework though as if you look through this forum you will observe the awful fallout for those that don't.

 

[jasonuk]

It all comes back to money...

Many affiliate programs - and this extends beyond the gambling industry - will explicitly exclude *any* criticism of their brand or product. So a "review" site cannot objectively review the site without foregoing affiliation.

Naturally some review sites have ill-intent from the start and their reviews are bogus, e.g. promoting scam casinos, "not on self-exclusion programs" or others with severe traps in the T&Cs (e.g. "VIP" casinos with no deposit limits and $500/week withdrawal limits, accepting players from forbidden jurisdictions).

It's most telling what sites do when something goes wrong though. A historical example here at CM with the occasional operator that thought the accreditation was the hard part and then started stonewalling Max on PABs... predictably that accreditation didn't last long

 

[maxd]

Funny story is (mildly) applicable here: years and years ago, back in the days when Casinomeister was Bryan roaming the industry conventions alone talking to people in person, Bryan bumped into a guy whose casino he had recently tossed in the Rogue Pit. The guy seemed quite agitated and Bryan was worried that he was going to have a big blow-up to deal with on the convention floor. Turns out the guy had a proposition for Bryan: “Please keep me in the Rogue Pit and say bad things about me! I’ll pay you 5 grand a month for it! I’ve never had so much traffic!” Just goes to show you that you can warn the players but you can’t control what they do with that information.

- Max

 

[jasonuk]

Turns out the guy had a proposition for Bryan: “Please keep me in the Rogue Pit and say bad things about me! I’ll pay you 5 grand a month for it! I’ve never had so much traffic!”

There's always an element of trying to safe face as well (similar to refund scammers who "knew it was a scambaiter all along" four hours into the phone call), but the adage that all publicity is good publicity still rings true sadly.

 

[TheAddict]

The story Max shared above regarding a guy claiming he would pay to be kept in the rogue pit stinks of nothing more than bluff from a desperately fuming loser. imo, of course.

 

[mulven]

The story Max shared above regarding a guy claiming he would pay to be kept in the rogue pit stinks of nothing more than bluff from a desperately fuming loser. imo, of course.

nah it sounds like all publicity is good publicity to me. EDIT: Ah crap didnt see that jason already whipped out that one

 

[ericodapro]

Nice, Ill take a look at it. I do have alot of "dirt" on a few casinos that are rated highly on another review site.