Suggestion (for Bryan) Review non-accredited casinos?

[Valhalla]

Have you ever thought of doing this Bryan?
I play at a few solid but non-accredited casinos that I would rate very highly, but the thought occurred to me... "what would their rating be on Casinomeister?"
Despite the content of my first thread here where I questioned your rating of 32Red, I do value and respect your opinion and your ratings here

I also understand why you only review casinos that are on-board here, but you couldn't be contractually obliged not to review other casinos, right? Whilst having a lot of influence and respect in the online gaming world, you're not an official entity as such, so would I at least be right in saying you could rate non-accredited casinos if you so wished? You wouldn't really be stepping on anyone's toes so to speak.

I'm just curious. I'd love to know how casinos like BetVictor and paf (to name a couple) would stand up against the big boys here

Or perhaps you yourself are not actually allowed to talk about casinos that aren't directly affiliated with the website?

 

[Valhalla]

Just after posting this the thought dawned on me that obviously you're (quite rightly) not going to give free advertising to casinos that aren't even interested in being affiliated with Casinomeister.
So I've probably answered my own question there

 

[Tirilej]

Just after posting this the thought dawned on me that obviously you're (quite rightly) not going to give free advertising to casinos that aren't even interested in being affiliated with Casinomeister.
So I've probably answered my own question there

Maybe we could rate a few members instead.

I would probably rate you at 9.1, but for this embarrasing thread you'll lose a little and went down to just 8.9.

Still a good result I must say :notworthy

 

[dunover]

Have you ever thought of doing this Bryan?
I play at a few solid but non-accredited casinos that I would rate very highly, but the thought occurred to me... "what would their rating be on Casinomeister?"
Despite the content of my first thread here where I questioned your rating of 32Red, I do value and respect your opinion and your ratings here

I also understand why you only review casinos that are on-board here, but you couldn't be contractually obliged not to review other casinos, right? Whilst having a lot of influence and respect in the online gaming world, you're not an official entity as such, so would I at least be right in saying you could rate non-accredited casinos if you so wished? You wouldn't really be stepping on anyone's toes so to speak.

I'm just curious. I'd love to know how casinos like BetVictor and paf (to name a couple) would stand up against the big boys here

Or perhaps you yourself are not actually allowed to talk about casinos that aren't directly affiliated with the website?

A bit like asking an online shop to provide reviews for items they don't even sell!
Don't forget part of the rating number itself is accrued by things like having a rep and history on here so that would render any scores almost meaningless.

 

[Casinomeister]

Actually, it's not a bad idea. There is the reservation for one thing:
https://www.casinomeister.com/grey-zone-casinos/

Where in fact Betvictor is listed:

Previously known as "Victor Chandler Casino", they were listed in our Accredited Section from 2004 until some years later when their casino rep fell off the face of the earth and no one took his place. Subsequently they were removed and they have not shown an interest to have any presence here. Their loss - not mine. They get relatively good reviews in our forum. If they wanted to come back on board, I don't see any issues that would keep them from doing so.

Scoring them would be a little tricky since the date of accreditation is taken into account, but there may be ways around this.

 

[dunover]

There are plenty we've played at like Heypoker, Jetbull, Playhippo, Casumo, Whitebet etc. (excuse if I included some that are already accredited!) that could be rated. This though would depend on feedback from forum members who could validate cash-out times, KYC times, CS etc. Sort of like an unofficial BbF?

A 'Separate but Safe' section?

 

[Journeyman]

that would indeed be a bit tricky and give a lot of confusion if you think a bit about it.
maybe another kind of rating system is proper here or a different approach.

 

[Valhalla]

but for this embarrasing thread

A bit like asking an online shop to provide reviews for items they don't even sell!

I was feeling a bit embarrassed. But then....

Actually, it's not a bad idea.

The Casinomeister redemption

I do like dunover's "separate but safe" idea

 

[Valhalla]

Seeing as you're not exactly against the idea Bryan...

I do think a more liberal, less formal rating system could be applied to non-accredited casinos here (if you ever did decide to review them).
Obviously having an active forum rep and length of time accredited couldn't apply to the rating, but that shouldn't detract from how good a casino is overall because it would obviously be an immediate handicap.

The beauty of it would be - because the casino(s) in question aren't accredited, you wouldn't have to strictly adhere to the Casinomeister's rating program which could come up with scores that we might not agree with (I hark back to your lucid explanation to me as to why 32Red remained so highly rated). You could use a more general approach, an overall view of how each casino is viewed by yourself first and foremost, and by the community here as a whole.

Aaaaand... I think a possible advantage would be; some casinos that you rate might feel inclined to finally come on-board.
They might not agree with their rating. They might just wanna prove they are better than what we think

 

[Journeyman]

^^

IF it comes so far this then is quite a good example of how you could do it.

 

[Casinomeister]

So, from what I'm reading here, you want me to start working again.

 

[Valhalla]

You'll deserve your beer afterwards

 

[dunover]

Don't forget Valhalla there are already non-accredited casinos on here that have reps.

 

[Valhalla]

Yeah of course mate, that's a good point. It would certainly be an advantage but not imperative.
The whole point of the "separate but safe" would be that the casinos listed under that section (if it were to exist) would be that they aren't necessarily on Casinomeister, in any form in some cases. But an active, or even semi-active (contactable) rep would definitely be a boon

 

[hedgehok]

I really like the "separate but save"-idea.
The only thing I would make imperative is a Rep here (or someone active, representing the casino).

I would also suggest if a casino makes it into this section to allow a 30day BBF-quick approval to promote into the accredited list if the casino decides to make this step.

 

[spoton]

I don't like that idea very much. There are plenty of other places that rates unaccredited casinos, and I think rating of others here could create a confusion over who the site recommends and not.

If you play on other sites that you feel are worthy of being on this site, why not ask them too and tell them about the pros of becoming accredited here? I have done it a few times, and atleast one of the sites got a BBF not longer after.

 

[Casinomeister]

Don't forget there is the "Reservation" where a number of casinos are listed with a brief commentary;
https://www.casinomeister.com/grey-zone-casinos/

I could add a numerical rating to most of these if my comments are not enough. But that may take some time.

If a casino wants to come on board, all they have to do is visit this page and follow its instructions:
https://www.casinomeister.com/becoming-accredited/

 

[AintWon1967]

I don't like that idea very much. There are plenty of other places that rates unaccredited casinos, and I think rating of others here could create a confusion over who the site recommends and not.

If you play on other sites that you feel are worthy of being on this site, why not ask them too and tell them about the pros of becoming accredited here? I have done it a few times, and atleast one of the sites got a BBF not longer after.

I agree the ratings should be for accredited casinos only.

I would like to see a link to the reps that are part of the casinomeister community in the reservation section underneath the little write ups that are already there that say why they are in the reservation section so you don't need to go to reservation section and then i-gaming reps section.

I think a separate section section could be added to the reservation section that lists sites that players recommend (legitimate Casinomeister members with good knowledge of what makes a good casino as well as being held in high regard by many members) and a link to any rep that is here in the Casinomeister community.
If there is no rep, it should state no rep so people can make better decisions on their options should they run into troubles.

I don't think it necessary to rank hundreds of casinos like the other sites. The cream rises to the top!
Good= player recommended
Better= reservation
Best = accredited

Connie

 

[dave1888]

The best way to get casinos on board is simply inform them of Casinomeister/BBF when you join a new one and first speak to live chat. I always do as this casino forum has been a valuable resource to me and generally a pleasant place to frequent. Then quite often they are on board a few days later or attempting BBF. You're welcome