Corrupt Casino Watchdog Discussion

[amandajm]

I know Ladbrokes from the street for 15 years. Top operation. Ibas sealed.

Theoretical scenario >> I have no money. Just about to sign a 250k advert deal. Ladbrokes decide to take a stand on apparent bonus abuse over 20 on 1 random player out of 1000 and pay the rest, then move them on, to make a point.

CPA showed me the way. I listen when taught. Because I would sign the 250k deal.

Corrupted? Is Caruso right? (see below)

Question - Can a portal take advertising money and take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises?

To Caruso - I am curious about one thing. Given your previous positions on webmasters and affiliates having conflicts of interest in player disputes, have you now come to accept that it is possible for industry people to handle player issues without bias or favour even if advertising for online casinos?

To Jetset - Conflict of interest is an insurmountable problem: in order to have influence you must have interests, because without the interests you will have no power - unless you are a powerful entity unto your self, as Casinomeister is after seven years in the job. The power is in those affy banners you can use to exert influence; without those, you have no power; with those, you have conflict of interest.

Question: you have a 50K media buy up: the casino steals a player's $50 bonus and $100 winnings and refunds his deposit; what do you do? If the casino just THREATENS to, then pays up, what do you do?

If you even have to CONTEMPLATE the answer, you are corrupt.

 

[scrollock]

the problem with affiliate banners, is that if a decision needs to be made regarding keeping a certain casinos banners, is that it requires a subjective decision, however as money is involved, then the chances of this decision being made impartially is very much reduced and much more likely to side with a persons own greed (no matter how much they deny it)

this is akin to a casino which rules on it own disputes without an outside body (such as playtech at the moment), the chances of having a fair and impartial decision is very much reduced as the companies balance sheet will decide the result and not what it is fair.

when it comes to affiliates taking down banners on the point of principle that they would rather forgo an affiliate payment than have a player ripped off, well i just simply dont buy it.

affiliates will take down the banners of rogue casinos because they dont want their site tarnished and their integrity questioned, as they know if they have a rogue casino on their site they know the informed player will simply not return to the site, thus the affiliate is thinking with his pocket

another thing is, if a casino is rogue and doesnt honour paying out winning customers, then the chances of them being honourable with their affiate deals is much reduced, so any sensible webmaster would keep away from them, again the webmaster is thinking with his own pocket.

going back to the hypothetical scenario, i dont think there is any webmaster in this virtual world who would take a stand on matter of principle over one customer and one small payment.

the only time a webmaster takes action is when his own income threatened either by a casino being so rogue it wont pay up, or a casinos reputation has become so bad that it threatens the traffic to the site.

 

[The Dude]

Speaking from experience, if there is a 250k deal or even a 50k deal going on, then it's definitely not a watchdog site.

I would suppose that webmaster - starring hard at the 250k, and on the other hand at some obnoxious bonus whore - that webmaster would probably chose the money.

If we're going to make a debate about this cash vs integrity thing, how about making the scenario a bit more realistic

 

[Pinababy69]

This should be interesting. And I am gonna bite my tongue as hard as I can, lol.

 

[The Dude]

How about this - you're just getting ready to accept a 2k media buy from xyz casino, and the day before the campaign is being launched, someone complains on some other portal's message board that his winnings have been confiscated. That's all the details you have. What do you do?

 

[The Dude]

Oh, and the xyzcasino is licensed in Malta, and has been in business for six months. It doesn't take US players.

 

[Simmo!]

I do believe some webmasters can be objective if that's your question. I believe there are some good people in the world where not everything centres around money. Probably a minority though more's the pity.

 

[swampwitch]

How about this - you're just getting ready to accept a 2k media buy from xyz casino, and the day before the campaign is being launched, someone complains on some other portal's message board that his winnings have been confiscated. That's all the details you have. What do you do?

PM the player in question and ask permission to look into the problem for him. Weigh both sides. If the casino is clearly at fault, or won't answer questions satisfactorily, do not accept their business and/or drop them from your site. If the player is clearly at fault, let him know that you can't go to bat for them because of this. If the dispute turns out to be a 50/50 at fault ambiguous mess, try to mediate a comfortable solution for both parties.

Now, where did I put those rose colored glasses.....

 

[The Dude]

PM the player in question and ask permission to look into the problem for him. Weigh both sides. If the casino is clearly at fault, or won't answer questions satisfactorily, do not accept their business and/or drop them from your site. If the player is clearly at fault, let him know that you can't go to bat for them because of this. If the dispute turns out to be a 50/50 at fault ambiguous mess, try to mediate a comfortable solution for both parties.

Now, where did I put those rose colored glasses.....

But let's say you have no way to get in touch with the player. You're not a member of the other portal's message board - and you have no way to test the validity of the player's complaint.

 

[scrollock]

PM the player in question and ask permission to look into the problem for him. Weigh both sides. If the casino is clearly at fault, or won't answer questions satisfactorily, do not accept their business and/or drop them from your site. If the player is clearly at fault, let him know that you can't go to bat for them because of this. If the dispute turns out to be a 50/50 at fault ambiguous mess, try to mediate a comfortable solution for both parties.

Now, where did I put those rose colored glasses.....

ideal solution and an ideal world, unfortunatly both dont exist.

for the simple fact is, when faced with only one dispute the webmaster will vote with his pocket and sweep the matter under the carpet,he will only take action when there are so many compliants that he is unable to sweep them away and will only then do it then because it will affect his other income.

 

[swampwitch]

But let's say you have no way to get in touch with the player. You're not a member of the other portal's message board - and you have no way to test the validity of the player's complaint.

Just join the forum. I can't even tell you how many forums I'm a member of and never go back. Then you can post and/or pm the person. Also, if you're already doing business with the casino in question, it shouldn't b too hard to get "your guy" to look into the problem.

Of course this doesn't take into account the occasional putz who just plain lost and decides to post all over hell about how "crooked" xyz casino is and then just disappears. Or the rival forum owner who creates a new account and posts just to discredit the other forum's choices in sponsors.

Here's the point...Any forum/portal owner who takes a lucrative deal and then does not also look out for the players AND the casino's he/she represents is not a person one should be downloading from. The definition of "fairness" may not always be black and white, but the best we can do is at least TRY to be aboveboard.

The argument can be made that there is no such thing as a "true" watchdog, because all current watchdogs also either promote casinos/bingo/poker/sportsbooks...OR....the money used to run the watchdog is provided by gambling venues. BUT, each portal/forum has the responsibilty to watchdog what goes on.

So, watchdog as VERB is what we should all aspire to.

 

[swampwitch]

for the simple fact is, when faced with only one dispute the webmaster will vote with his pocket and sweep the matter under the carpet,he will only take action when there are so many compliants that he is unable to sweep them away and will only then do it then because it will affect his other income.

Sorry scrollock, but we're not all like that. I know Sorrelltop and myself have dropped our share of casinos and poker rooms who haven't lived up to what we believe is fairness to the player...and lost quite a bit of income in the process. Hell, Bryan's dropped entire software groups.

Please don't paint all webmasters with the same brush.

 

[swampwitch]

To be fair....we also ban cheating, scamming players too.

 

[Simmo!]

Just out of interest JoeyL, what's your take on it?

Cheers

Simmo!

[edit: just saw Caruso's take on it in another thread so removed part of the question]

 

[spearmaster]

for the simple fact is, when faced with only one dispute the webmaster will vote with his pocket

Up to here, you're correct. Webmasters always vote with their pockets. I voted many times with my empty pockets - to keep them empty. And I don't doubt that sometimes, I might vote to fill my pockets if I believe the dispute isn't valid - and believe me many of the complaints that find their way to the forums are far from valid.

As for sweeping under the carpet - in my case at least, you're wrong. In Meister's case, I'm pretty sure you're wrong too. And as for the rest of the webmasters, they will speak up for themselves, you can be quite certain.

Like swampwitch said, don't paint us all with the same brush. After all, we don't paint all players with the same brush either (especially since most of us are also players!)

 

[Pinababy69]

Swampy, you just made me remember (again) why I love you and Sorrell so much. You have voiced perfectly everything that I feel about this issue, thanks!!! Excellent points. Especially this one....

The argument can be made that there is no such thing as a "true" watchdog, because all current watchdogs also either promote casinos/bingo/poker/sportsbooks...OR....the money used to run the watchdog is provided by gambling venues. BUT, each portal/forum has the responsibilty to watchdog what goes on.

So, watchdog as VERB is what we should all aspire to.

 

[The Dude]

ideal solution and an ideal world, unfortunatly both dont exist.

for the simple fact is, when faced with only one dispute the webmaster will vote with his pocket and sweep the matter under the carpet,he will only take action when there are so many compliants that he is unable to sweep them away and will only then do it then because it will affect his other income.

Well, for whatever reason amandajm entitled the thread "Corrupt Casino Watchdog Discussion" not "Corrupt Casino Portal Discussion" Some of us may be missing something here.

Scrollock - it's a sad day in Casinomeisterland since you think that webmasters like me would say screw the player and take the the 2k.

 

[caruso]

But let's say you have no way to get in touch with the player. You're not a member of the other portal's message board - and you have no way to test the validity of the player's complaint.

You will have noted I know sod all about this after my "50K media buy" example.

1) Take the deal - innocent until proven guilty.

2) Investigate the complaint.

3) If valid, pay back the money and pull the banner.

Why would you even CONTEMPLATE anything else? I wouldn't - and if the situation ever arises, you're more than welcome to quote me.

Of course, I'm assuming 3) is an option - so see my "know sod all" caveat.

 

[The Dude]

Just join the forum. I can't even tell you how many forums I'm a member of and never go back...

Oldtimers like me never join other message boards unless they are non-casino related. I eat in my own restaraunt and not across the street

I think common sense rules on this one. If you're taking money from someone, you got to know who you are dealing with, and if there is anything that makes you uncomfortable about this - then don't do it. Simple as that.

I'm moving this to the "Industry Discussion Section" since this is strictly industry related.

 

[swampwitch]

Oldtimers like me never join other message boards unless they are non-casino related. I eat in my own restaraunt, and not across the street

Silly me.

 

[Pinababy69]

Scrollock - it's a sad day in Casinomeisterland since you think that webmasters like me would say screw the player and take the the 2k.

I agree. I need look no further than the casinos advertised on this site to see that this site and it's owner do indeed have integrity. I don't see any banners for Connect To Casino, or Cirrus, or Virtual Casino...or any of the Playtechs that have had all these complaints lately (among many others too numerous to list). The list goes on. What I do see represented are reputable casinos, and a webmaster/portal owner who is willing to go to bat for anyone with a LEGITIMATE complaint. From what I see he gets very little compensation and/or thanks for doing that..and from what I'm reading today, very little respect either. Yes, I'm sure he collects revenue from advertising, and there is nothing wrong with that as long as the casinos he advertises are reputable. I also see a constant litany of complaints from people who sign up at less than desirable casinos, who don't bother to familiarize themselves with the casino or it's T & C's, and then the first place they run to when they have a problem is Casinomeister. I don't think that the average player understands the time and effort involved in dealing with issues like what we see posted here everyday. And this "mediation" service is provided to players free of charge. If only more webmasters were as diligent and industry-minded as Bryan, online gaming would be a much safer and enjoyable form of entertainment. Until I see something drastic that changes my mind, I certainly have no issues with the way I see business done here. It's professional, it's informative, it's helpful and sometimes it's even fun. It bothers me to see an established member here feel any less, and to question the integrity of this site.

 

[Simmo!]

I agree. I need look no further than the casinos advertised on this site to see that this site and it's owner do indeed have integrity. I don't see any banners for Connect To Casino, or Cirrus, or Virtual Casino...or any of the Playtechs that have had all these complaints lately (among many others too numerous to list). The list goes on. What I do see represented are reputable casinos, and a webmaster/portal owner who is willing to go to bat for anyone with a LEGITIMATE complaint. From what I see he gets very little compensation and/or thanks for doing that..and from what I'm reading today, very little respect either. Yes, I'm sure he collects revenue from advertising, and there is nothing wrong with that as long as the casinos he advertises are reputable. I also see a constant litany of complaints from people who sign up at less than desirable casinos, who don't bother to familiarize themselves with the casino or it's T & C's, and then the first place they run to when they have a problem is Casinomeister. I don't think that the average player understands the time and effort involved in dealing with issues like what we see posted here everyday. And this "mediation" service is provided to players free of charge. If only more webmasters were as diligent and industry-minded as Bryan, online gaming would be a much safer and enjoyable form of entertainment. Until I see something drastic that changes my mind, I certainly have no issues with the way I see business done here. It's professional, it's informative, it's helpful and sometimes it's even fun. It bothers me to see an established member here feel any less, and to question the integrity of this site.

Simmo's "Post Of The Day" award

You sometimes wonder why some players (no-one in particular) even bother with online gambling the way they go on about how corrupt it is.

 

[Pinababy69]

You sometimes wonder why some players (no-one in particular) even bother with online gambling the way they go on about how corrupt it is.

Funny you should mention that Simmo, I was talking to someone on the phone the other day and said the exact same thing. We were talking about constant rants of this software is rigged, this BJ game is fixed, the people from this casino are thieves, this webmaster is crooked, and on and on. I stated that if online gaming ceased to be fun for me, and became a source of such angst, I would just simply quit...and move on to something that provided more pleasure. And if you truly believe that it is all fixed, and you can NEVER win..why are you playing? {shaking head}

 

[vinylweatherman]

Certain Affiliates

I tend to judge affiliate sites by who they advertise. When I see a site happily plugging away with juicy offers for joining Vegas Red and another couple from the same group (without telling punters that this is actually against the terms as said group), along with Golden Palace and a couple of others on the dubious list I tend to inform the impression that it is the operator that pays the most (having made the most), rather than the fairest, that gets listed.

My own site cost me 33, and has generated the grandiose sum of 18 from one Fruit machine player who had a crack at Intercasino, but then thought better of it after 2 months. I doubt, therefore, I would ever be facing this moral dilemma, however I can see why there would be a question if the amount on offer was very large in comparison with what an affiliate was currently making. If an affiliate managed to get a bad image, but was prepared to take the money rather than take the moral high ground, they would simply start again with a new looking site and port their deals over to it. A new site would allow then to start with a clean slate, and this is a practice often employed by dodgy builders, plumbers and the like, once they become known well enough for shoddy work and dodgy deals. It can be quite hard to tell if that "new" company is really new, or just a reincarnation of a bankrupted rogue taking advantage of company law.

It seems more than likely I am promoting the wrong thing, I should be doing Poker as the main feature, as whenever one of the fruit machine players asks me something about gaming online, it is invariably about Poker (and whether it is rigged, can be trusted etc - just as on this forum).
My original idea was to introduce an alternative to our UK Fruit Machines, which pay a mere 70% to 74% back, as opposed to the 95% or so online.

 

[Chatmaster]

This will by far be my longest post ever, and is purely based on my own experience, if anyone disagrees on points I made, I’d love to hear from you…

I have to add the following. In the scenario explained above by the meister. I would say that both the player and casino has a responsibility towards the webmaster to sort this out ASAP. Many times disgruntled players makes a bad post in order to bad the casino and nothing more, this is the case most of the time. In many other cases the player is all upset but missed a point in the T&C or didn't understand something as well as they should have. If the matter is that serious and the player does want it resolved they do most of the time react to any requests from the webmaster in order to sort out the issue almost instantly. On the other hand casinos tend to avoid issues only if they know they did screw up. If they have a valid point and can support their actions they usually reply very quickly to resolve the matter.

I also would like to add at this point that many casino operators are extremely scared of the unknown, to many casinos views an open forum is a VERY scary place and they feel it is the most dangerous place on earth,... This is normally caused by senior management feeling that it is dangerous to engage with player issues in a public forum due to them being taken to the slaughter. It is also often difficult for the casino to react to certain claims made as sometimes if they are at fault,... in the majority of open forums they are taken to the slaughter by all the forum members and things can often get out of hand. Unfortunately this is the reality at forums where the webmasters are still green or afraid to take a stand against members that get out of hand as they need those members to have a forum Off course there are also the arrogant I am a rich bastard casino bosses. I think we all know some of them, but they are truly in the minority.

From personal experience I can also tell you this much, and affiliates or other potential watchdog sites can learn from the big, BIG webmasters that are engaging in the discussion on this forum, they are that big because they take the right decisions. You can only earn the top dollar if you build your business on good ethics. I am pretty confident that the webmasters involved in this thread will easily kick any casinos bum even for 200k if they have proven to be rotten and arrogant scoundrels! I hope none of you would disappoint me on that issue.

At the end of the day you get two types of forums...

You get the forums that are an absolute breeding ground for ranting, players, losers and BS artists. They are usually managed by either new webmasters or greedy selfish webmasters that actually want their members to loose so they can make more money. These rant forums are avoided by both reputable casinos and sensible players. So it is definite win loose situation. It is these forums where that player that endanger that 200k deal will soon find themselves banned and missing their delicious post as all evidence will just disappear for the sake of money.

Then you get the forum that have successful players on them, that gets the best plays because they are actually having fun whilst learning the facts and playing at reputable casinos. These forums are usually supported by both the reputable casinos and the best players. So it is a win, win situation. BS members and casinos soon feel they are unwelcome and leave so this is the paradise forum where everyone wins.

So in the case of the $2000... Maybe have an escape clause in your contracts with advertisers that in the case where a claim are made against a casino what the actions should be in order to resolve the issue, and if the issue doesn't get resolved in a timely manner the advertising contract will be terminated at X costs. Reputable casinos know that good and solid websites assist them in keeping their players happy and fulfill a very important role for them, they will therefore try everything in there power to do their best to resolve problem issues to prevent termination of advertising contracts. Years ago my Colonel would always say "discipline wetwipe (youngster),... ruthless discipline!"

 

[dominique]

the problem with affiliate banners, is that if a decision needs to be made regarding keeping a certain casinos banners, is that it requires a subjective decision, however as money is involved, then the chances of this decision being made impartially is very much reduced and much more likely to side with a persons own greed (no matter how much they deny it)

The described webmaster is not very smart. What is s/he thinking?

Casinos are a dime a dozen. If you have a decent website that draws good numbers of players, it also draws good numbers of casinos. You can pick and choose to your heart's content.

If you have a small site, you can do the same because you are on a pure affiliate base rather than accepting prepaid advertising. You are just as free to pick and choose that way.

The above would make sense if the number of casinos out there was small. But with hundreds of them, all needing exposure to players, any one of them has no power over anyone.

The webmaster described above is greedy and small minded and doesn't think ahead. You want a clean industry to work in, you want partners you can trust, and most of all, you want happy players that come back again and again. If the player ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.

Most webmasters I see promoting crappy casinos do so because of ignorance. They don't read the player boards. They have no idea what is going on out here. And there some who don't give a hoot. Both of those usually end up coming running and complaining because the crappy casino didn't pay them either.

These things do have a way of cleaning themselves up. What goes around, comes around in this industry.

As far as being a watchdog - I certainly don't claim to be one. Yes, I screen the places I allow on my site, yes, I back players who use my links. But I am not a watchdog - Bryan is a watchdog. I just try to run a clean site people can trust, I don't try to clean up the industry. (well, ok, sometimes I get on a soapbox, but that's not the same)

Bryan actually cleans up the industry, and so do other real watchdog sites.

Real watchdog sites are far and between, and you can't just start one today and be resolving issues tomorrow. To resolve issues you have to have the ear of the concerned parties. It takes time and effort to gain that kind of influence.

I can only influence the places that are on my site, because they want to stay there and that gives me pull. So, what I can do is limited.

Bryan can influence places he doesn't have on his site. That is what a real watchdog needs to be able to do. The watchdogs in this industry do us all an incredible service. And more often than not this mediating business is very, very aggravating because both the casinos and players are angry and you sit in the middle trying to make headway. It can be about as annoying as anything can get.

 

[Pinababy69]

Real watchdog sites are far and between, and you can't just start one today and be resolving issues tomorrow. To resolve issues you have to have the ear of the concerned parties. It takes time and effort to gain that kind of influence.

Excellent points!!

 

[Simmo!]

Just out of interest JoeyL, what's your take on it?

 

[Chatmaster]

The casino industry is a very close knit community that is for sure. Any casino that doesn't get that and act foolishly by avoiding casino watchdog sites like Casinomeister has discovered that it can hurt them allot and for a very long time (as bad posts don't go anywhere) if they are 'blacklisted' or rouged by a proper watchdog site it they will have to do allot of right to fix it. A proper watchdog site also have allot of valid evidence when they do take that step to rogue the casino. That is what many (As dominique said) ignorant webmasters don't get. Being in the SEO industry I deal with many webmasters that literally has 1000's of websites out there in all kinds of different industries. In my mind I honestly can't see how you can speak with authority if it is humanly impossible to keep these sites up to date and current. Nor can I see how you can speak with authority if you don't specialize in this industry either. There are to many things happening!

If you could take a list of this VERY young industry,... of really dodgy casinos and the reputable ones or the amount of dodgy casinos that has closed down due to their greedy or stupid behavior it actually becomes clear that the real culprit is the ignorant players that still support these corrupt webmasters. IMHO before I deposit money into a casino or poker room I will at least do a search on Google for "casinoname bad" and some other variations to see if they ever screwed up before. I will be even more impressed if I found something that was resolved.

To get back to webmasters. I mentioned earlier the webmasters with the 1000's of sites. I once had a chat with a certain one that laughed at me and said "I make $50k+ a month at an average of $50-$100p/m per website, how much are you making of your couple of websites?" I have news for you! Things are changing in the websites industry. You have to catch a wakeup right now and start building your support base, soon your website will not rank high unless you constantly work on it and update it. Then you can say goodbye to your $50k a month. Portals and proper sites will rule and the ignorant and arrogant will meet their doom.

I guess it again comes back to what dominique said earlier "What goes around, comes around in this industry." This is true for most things I guess

 

[amandajm]

Confused smiley man Simmo..

Because I would sign the 250k deal.

 

[Simmo!]

Because i would sign the $250k deal..

I missed that one

 

[The Dude]

Because I would sign the 250k deal.

But there are no 250k deals in this industry unless you are selling a well established website. A 250k media buy is absurd.

Would you sign the 2k deal? - that's what I'm getting at. That's a realistic situation.

 

[caruso]

I take it you're referring to your original example:

How about this - you're just getting ready to accept a 2k media buy from xyz casino, and the day before the campaign is being launched, someone complains on some other portal's message board that his winnings have been confiscated. That's all the details you have. What do you do?

Why is my proposition inadequate?

1) Take the deal - innocent until proven guilty.

2) Investigate the complaint.

3) If valid, pay back the money and pull the banner.

4) If invalid, keep the money, lol.

 

[amandajm]

But there are no 250k deals in this industry unless you are selling a well established website. A 250k media buy is absurd.

Would you sign the 2k deal? - that's what I'm getting at. That's a realistic situation.

The original question is sound - Can a portal/watchdog take advertising money and take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises?

Who is right? Caruso or Jetset?

 

[spearmaster]

The original question is sound - Can a portal/watchdog take advertising money and take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises?

A portal/watchdog/webmaster cannot possibly take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises, if only because in some cases the player is clearly wrong and the casino is clearly right.

I think Meister has done a pretty good job meeting the principle you are trying to establish here, and I would hope that I did the same when I was running a portal.

Someone offering me 250K is simply not going to happen, nor will it happen for any gambling portal, including the top five portals. It is unrealistic to believe that any casino will cough up more than 20K for any online media buy at any one time.

So, let's get the example a little closer to real life. I can honestly assure you that 2-20K would not influence any of the big webmasters, and would not have influenced me either (most I think I turned down was 10K though - but that was the largest deal offered to me).

Offer me 250K, I'd be an idiot not to at least think about it. Offer me a mil, and I won't just give you a media buy - I'd hand the site over in a flash, not even one sec thinking about that. So yes, I suppose I have a price - but it is unrealistic that anyone would even begin to consider such a price so why should we discuss a scenario that can never occur?

 

[jetset]

Good post, Ted.

Taking the position that the player is right on EVERY occasion is imo no different to automatically assuming that the casino is ALWAYS right - it is not fair and it is not balanced, and that is what really good and responsible watchdog portalmasters strive for; to be prepared to support the legitimate cause...or criticise and condemn the party at fault and seek redress for wrongs.

In between those two polarities lie many grey areas where fault may not be as clearcut, other circumstances supervene or wrongdoing is shared. The good watchdog is able to assess both possibilities and sort the wheat from the chaff without getting prematurely superheated and negative toward either side.

In my opinion Casinomeister is one of the best exponents of this principle, and the fact that Bryan has in the past actually rejected lucrative (although perhaps not in the 250K range LOL) advertising from sub-standard operators reinforces that integrity. He's fired the asses of bad practice advertisers, too and that should be remembered by his critics. No hypothetical case there.

Taking advertising does not, contrary to some of the opinions I've seen expressed by a few players, presuppose that the webmaster is a whore, not to be trusted, is vulnerable to corruption or will not fight to get a just player's case resolved. That imo is entirely dependent on the integrity of the individual webmaster.

If Caruso has started a website that takes advertising, there will inevitably be times when he is criticised or his principles and responsibility are put to practical test. When that happens, if he can match Bryan's, and for that matter Ted's reputations in this area (despite the occasional and rather petty criticisms levelled at them) he will be doing well.

None of us (and I encompass the whole forum in that) are perfect, but I would hope that most of us try to be fair.

 

[jetset]

Just to lighten things up a little on this pleasant Sunday morning, Spear's comments in his final par bring to mind an anecdote relating to (I think) George Bernard Shaw.

Paraphrased, during a mild dining argument he asked a society hostess whether she would sleep with him for GBP 10, to which she replied with an offended negative.

He then asked whether she would sleep with him for GBP 100 and received a similarly indignant response.

When he upped the ante to a substantially larger figure the socialite started to equivocate and asked him if he thought her a whore, to which he replied with some amusement: "Madam, we have already established that...we are now negotiating price!"

 

[caruso]

A portal/watchdog/webmaster cannot possibly take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises, if only because in some cases the player is clearly wrong and the casino is clearly right.

??

Nobody asked that. The question was taking a stand on principle for the player, ie. when the player is in the right. Nobody is suggesting a stand when the player is in the wrong - other than obviously telling the player to take a hike. No idea where that came from.

The question was "Can a portal/watchdog take advertising money and take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises?"

I gave an example, which I'll mellow down to more realistic levels: 2K media buy, otherwise "reputable" casino tries to screw player out of a $50 bonus for casino-speak "bonus abuse" using "we reserve the right" etc.

Stress here in the light of apparent misunderstandings arising: the player is in the RIGHT.

1) If they refuse to pay, what do you do?

2) If they pay with some lame-ass excuse, having stated their "we reserve the right" copout as justification, what do you do? I DON'T mean a genuine misunderstanding. I mean where the casino tries it on then does a U-turn.

If you can't answer "pull them" to question 1)...enough said, LOL.

Question 2) is valid, because though paying, the casino has declared its hand and can no longer be considered reputable.

 

[spearmaster]

Nice one Jetset! LOL...

To keep it brief: Whether or not the casino was previously reputable or not is moot. If they withheld a payment claming "we reserve the right" and the player met the terms and conditions of whatever promotion it was, their advertising would have been off of Got2Bet (or Awesome Jackpots) in the seconds immediately following receipt of email or phone call.

My contracts also held a clause that said "I reserve the right" to cancel advertising at my own discretion without refund should such a situation arise. Fortunately, I never had to invoke that clause.

As you can see, it takes two to tango

 

[Simmo!]

If a casino is prepared to shaft a player, then they are obviously just as likely to shaft an affiliate. And vice-versa. So irresepective of the moral issues at stake, a webmaster would surely be shooting himself in the foot anyway representing them would he not?

A good webmaster will have more than one casino (group) vying for position on his/her site, so ditch the one that can't be trusted and talk to another. If one values the exposure at $10k, there's likely to be another.

As an aside, i had actually read "Can a portal/watchdog take advertising money and take a stand on principle for the player in EVERY situation that arises?" as meaning the webmaster will always back up the player in every situation (that arises) I'm relieved to see it doesn't mean quite what i thought it meant as, and pointed out above, situations vary.

 

[amandajm]

Always a fascinating discussion for me. Had it many times and am always open to suggestion. Jetset pre-empted a later post of mine that would entail mention of the film

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The paltry sum I got sold on for is private

Of course, standing up for a rogue player any more than hoping they get reasonable nourishment in jail is beyond me.