Topic: 🔥 Crypto-Gambling.Net 🔥 Crypto Casino Reviews By A Real Insider ✅ - page 4. (Read 1533 times)

What I hope to do eventually is offer way more information than other sites. Currently, I think I am on-pair or slightly above, but it can still get improved.
Another thing would be mentioning stuff that normal gamblers may not know.

I don't consider availability a real factor in reviews. All restricted countries is mentioned on the reviews, but it shouldn't affect the actual rank. You can easily get restricted from a bunch of countries just by getting a Curacao license and a few payment processors.

I understand, as I have seen in the forum some sites that are also dedicated to making this type of reviews, how is it different from the others? Some are quite radical in what they think and some users do not have any kind of tact to say things, in fact some are quite strong.

If I have the professional opinion that you establish and if I compare it with another site, why should I trust yours more than that of direct competition? I know that some factors to consider should have an impact on its availability for all countries, although the licenses give more confidence to the sites to the players, they can leave out many that really show talent.

Well yes, but I also feel like the concepts work better separately than combined.

Hopefully you find it really fun to do this because some of my friends that works in the IT sector don't find it amusing to work on a project. Why would you separate the project though? Will it be easier to do so than integrating it in the website?

Which review would you guys like to see next?
I'm currently working on a crypto.games review.

Just launched a brand new Rollbit review

I expect at least 5 new reviews to be released this month - Hopefully more

No worries, I didn't really mean to criticize you either.
It was more the point that there is not much of a difference between our sites, so I felt a bit unfair called out there.

Glad to hear that you have been taking action against manipulation though. Sounds like you know what you're doing

Firstly, thank you very much for taking the time to visit and critique my site. Good or bad, I appreciate the honesty from your first impressions on my site. I know every website owner says that they don't take affiliate commissions into consideration when conducting reviews, but there are some additional things I do to try and be more transparent.

For starters, the obvious is that some of my highest ranked sites don't even have affiliate programs eg. Bustabit and Bustadice.

Next, while all of my outbound links are cloaked, if you click through them you'll see that many aren't even affiliate links. This is most noticeable/impactful in the Poker category (particularly the sites in the top 5), but this is also true about the Software, Exchange, Forex, DFS, and Training categories as well.

Lastly, if you go to my site's changelog you'll see which reviews are monetized. Almost every review is in fact monetized, but I do at least try to be upfront about that. In the future I plan to put disclosures within the review pages themselves.


This exactly. Right now my site allows players to leave a star rating between 1-5, but having both and allowing visitors to see the discrepancy between the editor and the player pool is a much better method.

And to your point about dodgy casinos incentivizing users to cast votes, this is entirely true. I've already had two online gambling sites (both of which are no longer listed) do exactly what you said - give thousands of 1-star ratings to each of their competitors and 5-star ratings to themselves.


I guess there is no way for me to prove that I don't accept money in exchange for better rankings aside from just taking my word for it. But regarding the backlink, we actually request that it be a "No Follow" link, which holds far less value [if any at all] than a "Do Follow" link. IMHO, that was the most fair and honest way.

This is all a meaningless discussion though because to date there hasn't been a single site that has reached out to me about regarding the Trusted Partner program. 

I'm sorry for coming into your thread and turning the discussion towards my site. I just went and checked out Crypto-Gambling.net and it looks like you're off to an excellent start. I wish you the best of luck, and if you'd ever like to chat hit me up!

Yeah. Rollbit is on the list to get reviewed.

Factors to determine;

-Fees
-HE
-UI/UX
-Support
-Perks and bonuses

Its true that each gambler do have its own taste and perception on site.This is why personal judgement will really be different to each other

but well these kind of effort are still appreciated. @OP, would you have some time to review Rollbit.com?

Well, you can compare it to your own review if you are looking to have different result of review of the same gambling site. I'm sure you know that every gambler have their own taste of gambling platform. Some want a gambling site that have low house edge, possible lowest withdrawal fee and wide variety of cryptocurrency accepted as payment.

Well, generally speaking, I wanna have as many sites listed as possible.
In terms of the ratings themselves, I generally judge on as many factors as possible.

A proper review of this site will narrow down its features and for the best business experience, you will need a number of trading tools and features and the information on the site will become easier only when you are sure about the price movement when you choose to gamble on the limitations of real casino cryptocurrency.

According to how I see the ratings in OP they are not bad at all, really the sites you have are excellent, I want to know something, for the selection of casinos what criteria do you take into account? I imagine that apart from the reputation also the history? I mean, the age of the casino.

There are a number of casinos that are relatively young, some are nascent, but have built a great community and give a lot to talk about, I think you can imagine what casinos can be, in fact in the forum they have a lot of good Ann in the game area of chance. I have seen reviews of other sites and if they have any divergence, but they are small, some take it as very significant, but in the end I think that to give a final verdict they take into account the age.

Guess it could be a fun project. I'll put some thought into it and work on it. It would probably have to be a separate project though.

If you ask nicely and the idea is supported by a lot of people, I am pretty sure that the site is going to make a decision that will satisfy their client base, they don't want to be the party poopers.

That's actually pretty good because it helps the review site narrow down the list and have the community contribute to the body of knowledge. I can behind this idea and I hope that Crypto-Gambling.net is going to consider doing this feature.

Or try to add a feature on your site where people can submit any information regarding casino that they have tried. It is more like a google form and can be seen on spreadsheet but this one is different, it may be in your email but it's up to you where you will receive the information before you added on your site.
[/quote]
Yeah, but then I'm suddenly controlling what people can say. Sure, it'll work to some extent, but still not perfect.

Gonna be very hard to actually make such deals with websites though.
[/quote]Or try to add a feature on your site where people can submit any information regarding casino that they have tried. It is more like a google form and can be seen on spreadsheet but this one is different, it may be in your email but it's up to you where you will receive the information before you added on your site.