Editorial policy

Independence and the verdict firewall (editorial policy)

This page follows our Review methodology: 9-criteria weighted scoring across 17 deposit cycles per brand, with license, cashier and KYC tier evidence documented at Editorial policy.

The site earns affiliate commission from outbound clicks. That revenue funds the testing bankroll but does not change verdict scores. The separation is procedural rather than aspirational.

Scoring runs against the brand's trust file at data/casinos/<slug>.json, which contains no commission data. The verdict is signed off as final before any affiliate URL is wired into the review template. URLs are added in a separate pre-publish step. The editor never sees partner-rate data while writing a verdict.

A casino cannot pay for a higher score, an edited risk flag, or accelerated re-testing. Commission size does not affect listicle order. Whether a brand appears in a listicle at all is decided by the same six-axis methodology applied to every reviewed brand.

Sourcing and fact-check explained for crypto casino players (editorial policy)

Every numeric or licence claim on the site has at least two source URLs. The first is usually the brand's own page (terms, cashier, KYC). The second is an independent authority: a regulator registry, an external review database such as AskGamblers or Casino.guru, or an on-chain explorer for casino tokens. Sources are stored in the trust file alongside the claim they back.

When sources disagree, the conflict is recorded and the more conservative value is published. We do not smooth a disagreement into a midpoint. A reader checking the source can see exactly why the published number sits where it does.

Corrections explained for crypto casino players

Factual corrections are welcome. Email smartseokings@gmail.com with the page URL, the specific claim, and a source URL. Acknowledgement within 48 hours. Confirmed corrections published within 7 days. The page date_modified is updated and the change is recorded.

Rejected corrections are also acknowledged on the record, with the reason. A brand that disagrees with a verdict cannot pressure a takedown, but a verified factual error can move a published page in days.

Conflicts of interest explained for crypto casino players

The editor is permitted to hold small operational positions in casino tokens for testing purposes. Any held position is disclosed on the related review and the related token page. The editor does not accept paid trips, hosted events or per-review payment from any brand.

AI tooling explained for crypto casino players

AI is used for spell-check, link liveness scans and JSON-LD validation. It is not used to generate review prose, FAQ answers, methodology sections, risk-flag wording or brand descriptions. Reviews on this site are written by the editor whose byline appears on the page.

Update cadence explained for crypto casino players

Reviews are re-tested when a brand changes its licence, its owner, its KYC tier, its payment methods, or its casino-token contract. We do not run noise edits to chase rankings; updates happen when the underlying facts change.

Frequently asked questions explained for crypto casino players

Scoring runs against the brand's trust file, which contains no affiliate data. The verdict is signed off before any affiliate URL touches the page. URLs are wired in by a separate pre-publish step that runs after scoring is final. The editor never sees partner-rate data while writing a verdict.

On the data, acknowledged within 48 hours, published within 7 days for confirmed factual corrections. The page's date_modified is updated and the substance of the edit is recorded in our internal changelog. Rejected corrections are also acknowledged on the record with a reason.

No. AI tools are allowed for spell-check, link liveness scans and JSON-LD validation. They are not used to generate review prose, FAQ answers, methodology sections or risk-flag wording. Every review on the site is written by the editor whose byline appears on the page.

The offer is declined and the brand is moved to an internal do-not-partner list. The brand can still be reviewed; the review just runs without an outbound tracking link. Editorial influence is not for sale and is not negotiable.