1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Here's one way to foil spammers...

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by mary, Dec 31, 2002.

Tags:
    Dec 31, 2002
  1. mary

    mary Dormant account

    Read the last message in this thread.

    You must register/login in order to see the link.
     
    mary, Dec 31, 2002
    #1
    2. Jan 1, 2003
  2. babysister

    babysister Experienced Member MM

    Occupation:
    Law Enforcement
    Location:
    Hou, Tx. USA
    Brian;
    Help me to understand this. I usually don't undertand the technical discussions by opa mary. But I just read her link and this is my question and disturbing: If a casino have to pay their affliates a big percentage (no matter if their players win or lose) does that mean that that casino would have less winners so that it can make the affliates the big percentages ?(70 - 100%) Seems if that was the case, I wouldn't want to play at that casino because my chances of losing is greater because my deposits are going to the affliates but what about my honest deposit to try to win, not pay a third party. If the affliate is going to get his 100% pay at all cost then it would seem that casinos like that would not be attractive, honest and worthy to play at. :confused:
    Everyday, something is going on in the gambling community to make me keep my money in my pockets than take a chance on a casino on the internet.
     
    babysister, Jan 1, 2003
    #2
    3. Jan 1, 2003
  3. Casinomeister

    Casinomeister Forum Cheermeister Staff Member

    Occupation:
    Homemaker
    Location:
    Bierland
    The Casinos involed here are Grand Banks, Black Widow, and Sterling House. Black Widow was recently placed in our not recommended list and both Black Widow and Grand Banks have a history of slow or stalled payments.

    There is a lot of cynicism associated with this affiliate offer. It's mind boggling in the sense that to pay an affiliate 100% means that the casino did not take in a dime. So for this to work, they probably have some reserved cash stashed to cover the costs, or they are pooling it from somewhere else. Bear in mind that not all players arrive at a casino via an affifiate link. Some get there on there own or via a link that is a media buy.
     
    Casinomeister, Jan 1, 2003
    #3
    4. Jan 1, 2003
  4. Casinomeister

    Casinomeister Forum Cheermeister Staff Member

    Occupation:
    Homemaker
    Location:
    Bierland
    Oh and by the way, this thread was referring to the fact that Marc Lesnic made Casino-on-net a naughty word in his forum. Instead of Casino-on-net, the symbols &%#$ show up. This is a way to deal with spammers on his board.

    There is a special place for spam messages in this forum, so I don't have to deal with this problem this way. But it is an effective way of handling this sort of spam situation. In fact, it's pretty funny.
     
    Casinomeister, Jan 1, 2003
    #4
    5. Jan 2, 2003
  5. amandajm

    amandajm Experienced Member

    Occupation:
    Watch
    Location:
    London
    Thanks Bryan.

    I thought Marc was on about 1cnp.
     
    amandajm, Jan 2, 2003
    #5

Share This Page