Topic: 🔥 Crypto-Gambling.Net 🔥 Crypto Casino Reviews By A Real Insider ✅ - page 6. (Read 1533 times)

If you're referring to the fact that you have to enter your name, address, and those details, then I wouldn't blame that on Roobet. That's literally required by the Curacao license that they have, and due to the corona packages that Curacao has received from The Netherlands, they have also been forced to be way more strict with their gambling license. - If you prefer to gamble on sites with no licenses, then that's a matter of preference rather than really a factor that should matter in terms of reviews. It's a personal preference.

I am not even sure how it ended up with me having to defend Roobet, because I don't even like the casino. You're right that Roobet is not upfront about their house edges. Roobet's audience is way different from Bustabit's audience. Most of them don't even have a clue what RTP even means. I think the issue you're having is Roobet's rating of 4/5 stars. It seems too good, which it is, but I need to review more sites to more accurately rate Roobet as well. The reason for the current rating is due to the placement on the ranking, so when more casinos get added, I highly expect Roobet to slowly drop down to something like 2.5/5 stars.

And I am not sure what you mean by good examples. The GamblingSiteFinder one doesn't even have rankings based on reviews. The rankings on the front page are manually picked and seem to be based on who's paying the most. That doesn't seem very transparent. - Their reviews themselves look good though.
For the dicesites.com one, there is no type of reviews or anything like that. It's just stats from their betting activity, which is great to have offered, but it has nothing to do with what this is.

You can read about it on their bitcointalk thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.56811557 pretty much the last 10 pages are to do with it.


Besides that not being the case, you avoided my question: how much higher is their house edge than bustabit's? And how did you figure it out?

I've got zero problems with high house-edges or affiliate links or what ever, as long as sites are upfront about it.


I think a good example of an honest review site might be engadget's: https://www.engadget.com/reviews/ They review a lot of products, they have a lot of affiliate links, but they disclose there are affiliate links and do not use the presence or payout of affiliate earnings to influence their reviews/score.

In the crypto scene, in the gambling scene I think the only good example I've seen is https://GamblingSiteFinder.com and https://dicesites.com . And there also used to be thebitcoinstrip.com which offered unbiased reviews/rankings, until it was sold to a new owner who apparently figured out all the typical corrupt shit pays better. Sad.


Edit: This post has inspired me to put GamblingSiteFinder.com in my signature. I never knew what I could do with my signature, and feel they deserve a bit more credit than they are getting.

The affiliate links hardly matters. If they did, I would just place the casinos paying the highest commissions in top. Stake is actually amongst the lowest paying of the current ones.

As mentioned previously, I do plan on adding casinos like Bustabit to the site in the near future. I will never add the option to have affiliate and non-affiliate versions of the links. That ruins the whole point of it. If you like my review enough to wanna sign up on the casino because of it, then it's only fair that it's done through my affiliate link. Especially when you can easily avoid it by just googling the casino anyways.

And I have considered video reviews, but with my previous experience in running youtube channels etc., I kinda decided not to. The main disadvantage would be whenever casinos do updates, the whole video has to be remade, and the costs of each video review will easily reach $300+.

If I have done any type of work for any of the casinos within the past year. This may be consultancy work, full-time/part-time positions or volunteer work(Although I don't even do the latter). - That would be how I consider the actively worked.

Seems like a great initiative.

However, it's a bit hard to seem unbiased when you have affiliate links scattered across the site.

I understand that the site has to make money, but I think that you should have both affiliate and non-affiliate versions of the link and let the audience choose for themselves. That should inspire a lot more trust in the review process imho.

Also, having actual video reviews where you play would boost the reputation a lot more too - so consider that also.

I visit your site and I read the reviews made for different gambling sites, quite interesting. I hope you can give reviews to other popular sites here in the forum like for rollbit, 777coin, bitvest, freebitco.in etc. This site of yours is helpful for gamblers who are looking for casinos to play in especially for the newbies.

This is how it should be done to provide an accurate reviews because it has basis, and not just an opinion of someone without taking time to deposit and make a withdrawal.

i believe the OP should clarify about this thing -'actively worked'. people might be seeing wrong perspectives here.

anyway, the rating is his personal take on these sites, and maybe, he has his own set of criteria why he is giving those rating. and he is only basing on his experience. so for him, the experience is great but for some players, they encounter some troubles like the laggy interface, which i can agree as i experienced that also from time to time. but let's admit that no casino is perfect, at some point, you will experience some troubles. but it is how the site address such issue. are they fast in resolving issues or just ignoring them?

Well, the obvious problem is these "review" sites are dishonest. They purport to tell people which are the best places to play, but in reality have intentional omissions and re-sorting based on what makes the "review" site more money. I think it's rather simple, there's nothing inherently wrong with affiliate links, but if you claim "these are the best" any deviation from what you think is actually the best is dishonest.



lmao, it's only tough if you have a conflict of interest  For everyone else, it's pretty easy to say "umm don't play there, there are strictly better options"

I usually don`t post in other review sites`(affiliate sites`) threads but I feel like this time, I have to.

1) Providing honest reviews and using affiliate links, what`s the problem actually? I definitely know where you are heading and I have to agree, most affiliate sites would rank according to best deals etc. but, a big but... there are still sites that provide honest reviews (some do a better job than others but that`s not the point). Also, why would he add sites that would not reward him for free exposure on his site? Seriously, affiliates are spending countless hours and a lot of money and cannot be charity - why would such a "big site" not reward for exposure and traffic sent? AFAIK, they are not featuring his website for free either... ^^

2) Roobet... yeah, with Roobet it`s tough... they are doing some things right but at the same time, lack professionalism and much more. The KYC would not be the thing I would blame them for though... It`s about time - even if us crypto guys hate this - for crypto casino regulation, that wild west doesn`t help anyone in the long run.

Oh. I apologize. This is my fault. I misread what you wrote, I thought you said you only review casinos you've worked for, but you said the opposite. 100% my fault, I misread your post.



I guess you're not too familiar with them Pretty much everyone is subject to some level of KYC. They also make an effort to hide their house-edge, but it's pretty easy to calculate from their provably fair. But even just hiding the house edge is a terrible practice. Homework question: What is the house edge of their bustabit clone? What is the house edge of bustabit?



I admit their UI is slick, but it's pretty much the least important part of a casino. They might not be an evil company (e.g. bitstarz) but there's literally no reason anyone should use it. Really the whole point of a review site is to let people know where they should and shouldn't be playing. Whether intentional or not, you're doing a terrible job at that and a misservice to anyone who reads your list, and are just a collection of affiliate links  

I guess what he meant by 'actively worked' here is that he played in those sites with his own money. Could have also meant to say that he worked in several offline casinos.

The KYC part is the main point. That alone deserves a deduction of 1 whole point from the overall rating. Also, Stake deserves a 4-4.5 rating instead of 5 thanks to their laggy interface.

You're accusing me of not including bustabit/bustadice just because they don't offer an affiliate program. That's simply just false. There are 7 sites so far. There are many sites that are not yet reviewed, and frankly, I don't think there is much to review on bustabit/bustadice, although there will surely come a review someday. Daniel is a great guy, and I admire him(as well as Ryan) for what has been achieved in the brand.

I don't understand what you mean by the "Are you trying to say you've "actively worked for" all these casinos in the past year?" - Which casinos are you referring to here?
I haven't seen direct examples of their house edges being multiple times greater than competitors(At least not direct competitors), I have never heard about anyone ever having to do a KYC on there, and while there is some unethical marketing in there, I would say that can count for most sites.
With that being said, I expect Roobet to slowly move further down the list as more sites are getting added.

And well, while that is a possibility, I literally don't see why, and on top of that, I can also guarantee that it's a format that I would never use on my own site.

Not to be overly frank, but c'mon. All the links are just undisclosed ref links, and you exclude some of the best and biggest sites (imo bustabit, bustadice) because they don't offer an affiliate program.



Are you trying to say you've "actively worked for" all these casinos in the past year? I find that so hard to believe, that I wouldn't even know what position would allow you to do that? 0.0
I also kind of doubt you've worked in the industry at all based on your reviews. Like take the your roobet 4.5/5 rating. It's almost unconscionable to recommend them for any number of reasons. Their house edge is often multiple times greater than their competitors for the same thing, their KYC policies are many times worse, and have a history of highly unethical behavior of giving effectively fake money to streamers to promote their casino.



I actually was once thinking of this. If you talk to some of the real insiders (e.g. some big casino owners), they know a lot interesting of stuff that isn't public and they wouldn't want to come back to them.  One idea I had was you could ask each of the main insiders for a public key, and you could create a (1,n)-threshold scheme where any one of the participants can sign a message but it's impossible to tell which. That way you could get candid information from someone who actually knows what they are talking about, while they know it can't be attributed to them.

I would like to suggest Crypto.games

1. VIP membership
2. Provably fair
3. Fast withdrawals
4. Progressive jackpots
5. Low house edge
6. Secure and private

Lastly, Try to look on Btcgosu website and you might get some idea as well.

I have been running this site since October so far, and I have no plans on quitting at all.

And yeah, you're right. Not sure how I managed to get house edge and RTP mixed up in my head. I've fixed that.

Honest review of gambling sites based on a gambler experience is really something worth. There was another forum member (GamblingBro) who tried to make review based on his personal gambling experience but haven't heard anything from him after his first review. Hopefully you won't stop making reviews.

In Roobet review cons section you mentioned that “The RTP is higher than on other sites”. RTP means ‘Return to Player’. Actually the higher RTP is beneficial for gamblers. But the RTP is low at Roobet, isn't it? You should correct that. Higher house edge or lower RTP should be in cons section of a gambling site review.

Glad to hear that.

Weird about the Roobet sportsbook. I thought I had already removed it, but it has been fixed now regardless. And I guess that's true, but on the other hand - Most casinos enforces KYC. I have never experienced Roobet enforcing it though. Do you know anything about the limits?

More of the popular ones are coming. It varies a lot which ones are 'popular' based on where you find them as well. A lot of casinos are known on BitcoinTalk, while casinos known on etc. Twitter are usually completely different.

I liked the design of your site and how all the information is neatly organized. However, I found some glaring issues.

- Roobet doesn't have a sportsbook section and you should have deducted more stars since they enforce KYC.

- You reviewed a site that I have never heard of(Winz.io), but you didn't review several popular hotshots like Crypto.Games, Primedice, Sportsbet, Nitrogen Sports etc.

These are just a couple of issues that I observed. Decent first impressions overall!

Yeah, I plan on doing that. Just gotta see how everybody else does it for some inspiration first.