Ask gamblers review monitoring

[pinnit2015]

Well, one comment.

One size doesn’t fit all when it comes to review sites. Every place has different criterion; for some, the actions of affiliates may see blacklisted. Others may take the view that their attitude to fairness and clear terms are more important than that, and hence recommend them.
 

Comparing these is like apples and oranges unless you’re going to identify the reason for the blacklisting.

There are certain things however that I think should see any review site worth their salt, see blacklisted (or whatever you want to call it). Personally, any casino using pirated software for example, should be IMO.

I don’t look at a score and say I’ll play there based on a number. I look at the providers offered on the site, player comments, complaints etc. 

 

[jwholland]

@pinnit2015 Thank you for replying, and providing an informative opinion. I agree with you regarding differences in rating system, however, if a operations' own appointed ADR blacklists them.,combined with activity of reviews regarding, its not weird that someone asks questions..

@ValDes  Well I really don't understand how you can say this is 'another quest' After noticing the duplicate and multiple reviews by  same users, I found their own ADR score tells a different story. If I was in your place, maintaining a 'player driven' site, it would take action, investigate the accounts,, either to debunk my claims or restore validity of ratings.

[ValDes]

16 hours ago, jwholland said:

...

@ValDes  Well I really don't understand how you can say this is 'another quest' After noticing the duplicate and multiple reviews by  same users, I found their own ADR score tells a different story. If I was in your place, maintaining a 'player driven' site, it would take action, investigate the accounts,, either to debunk my claims or restore validity of ratings.

If you have proofs for duplicate reviews by same user/s, pls feel free to report these to [email protected], via live chat or by sending me a PM. Make sure to explain clearly what you found out to be in violation of AskGamblers Posting Guidelines and to support your accusations with proofs if any. 

Re "their own ADR" part, well, let me just remind you the website you are referring to is yet another casino affiliate website, same like AskGamblers. 

With the above, I consider the matter closed. Thanks in advance for your upcoming reports. 

[jwholland]

@ValDes

 

There are multiple screenshot in this topic that clearly show several violations:

"

While we could understand certain degree of evolution in your opinion regarding some online casino, we definitely cannot understand nor accept multiple comments on the same subject, for the same casino, posted within a short period of time.

"

>> see screenshots posted last Monday

"

Please, don’t steal content from other sites or users, we know you are smart enough to write your own reviews.

"

>> see screenshots at the start of the topic 

"

We need objective, justified and unbiased opinions. Period. Which means that if you are a casino rep, or casino employee, or even casino manager’s girlfriend you are not allowed to post comments under your brand’s own page here. And please, don’t ask your registered customers to do that too.

"

>> the screenshots also show a extreem high number of account with only 1 activity: posting a positive review, and afterwards inactive.. Have these been checked?

 

Regarding " their own ADR" part, well, Let me just remind you the website you are referring to is yet another casino affiliate website, same like AskGamblers. " 

>> well this is worrying as you indirectly state potential for bias.. A point about the ADR services of The POGG, I raised before. Hoever, this does not explain why Spinia is blacklisted by their own approved ADR, independent or not. 

Valdes, can you also please indicate if AG has a potential conflict of interest? Are you an employee of Catena Media ? Its part of 'Transparency' as AG states in the about section

[pinnit2015]

Every business has a potential conflict of interest - it why procedures are built to minimise it. When i worked for a large accountancy firm we offered consultancy services to clients we audited. In situations where we couldn't reduce that risk to a reasonable level or build enough safeguards, we refused either the audit or the consultancy service. In others where we could, we accepted and built safeguards into our work. Was there still a POTENTIAL for this? Of course. Just because there is potential, doesn't mean that there is.

Affiliate sites that offer complaints services do have the potential. I'm not going to comment how AG, or others, manage that as I'm not privy to that information.

Don't know why you're asking of Valdes works for Catena....it's perfectly transparent, from news reports, that Catena bought AG a number of years ago. 

[jwholland]

But even a potential of interest requires mentioning and providing  the information for the public, if one claims to be independent and player driven. Is this a review site or extended marketing tool?

Well I know they bought AG, but is not transparent.. I cannot find any disclosure on the site for conflict of interest, and the name Catena can only be found in the terms.. But since AG has strong connections with one of the N1 partners,  its of interest. He can just say yes or no, why would this be a problem? If you follow the AG posting guidelines, it  should be a 'no' .

But you're all gone say I'm starting a crusade again, or I'm an idiot.. Well,  if that is the case, it says all.

 

[pinnit2015]

Eh?

You don’t need to know that Catena are the parent company. The fact that they are an affiliate site and offer complaints site is transparent. How on earth can it not be?!

If TP weren’t above board they wouldn’t have been approved by the UKGC to be an approved ADR.  Same for another site. Jesus. 

[pinnit2015]

Where transparency wouldn't exist would be if the complaints service had no mention of it being funded by a group of casinos. The fact there are affiliate links on, funnily enough, an AFFILIATE site, pretty much tells it all. 

You constantly prattle on about TP but they basically passed this, according to the UKGC; ADR officials must not be remunerated in a way that is linked to the outcome of the dispute resolution process

So, reading into that, they satisfied the UKGC, but not you? Come on, get a grip man.

You are on a crusade, for reasons known only to you (sore loser, gambling issues, generally hates affiliates, i dunno)

I'll bid you the best because your stay will be short here. You'll probably say we're all part of the conspiracy, so be it. I'll pick up my Spinia cheque regardless. 

Adios Amigo. 

[ValDes]

On 11/16/2019 at 2:07 AM, jwholland said:

...

Valdes, can you also please indicate if AG has a potential conflict of interest? Are you an employee of Catena Media ? Its part of 'Transparency' as AG states in the about section

Sorry to say that but this is the most ridiculous question I have ever seen someone asking to an affiliate website! The nature of the word 'affiliate' says it all and of course, yes, their is potential for conflict of interests with both players and presented casino operators for the obvious reasons.  For your comfort, we are super proud of not allowing any potential conflict of interest to influence and/or interfere in anyway the fairness, the honesty and the quality of AGCCS. This is exactly why AGCCS is getting and resolving several times more complaints on a yearly basis that all other similar services combined! This is exactly why AGCCS got more new complaints last year than official ADR entities like IBAS, eCOGRA, etc!...   

Well, anyway, I have better things to do than offering assistance and answering questions coming from a person who simply doesn't take No as an answer! Unfortunately persons like @jwholland often confused the friendly, liberal and straightforward forum environment we built here and which we are so proud of with some easy access and opportunity to feed their personal vendettas.  Those of you who are with us for longer know well that both Sharon and I always try to give everyone a fair chance and tribune to share their opinion, regardless how often that turns into ridiculous, totally unfounded and unfair attacks on us and despite the fact those persons have been banned long time ago across other forums for doing the same.  Wish to believe we're simply too liberal or just believing in the good in people although often proved wrong by members like the aforementioned person...  Sigh!  

Enough is enough though! Our tolerance is obviously not endless so about time to put a stop on this ludicrous crusade and advise the OP to find some other place for the purpose. Apologies to our valuable forum community for not doing that much earlier.