Hej d?r.
Till?t mig att h?r n?mna sk?len du fick f?r dessa avslag.
"Hej och tack f?r din recension. Det verkar som att du missat att n?mna varf?r casinot ?r s? d?ligt, f?rutom att du f?rlorade. Casinon har alltid en f?rdel gentemot spelare s? det ?r en vanlig situation p? alla casinon att en spelare f?rlorar ins?ttningen. Skriv en ny recension med mer information s? att den kommer att vara mer anv?ndbar f?r andra spelare. Anv?ndarrecensioner b?r inte tj?na som en h?mnd mot kasinon d?r du f?rlorade din ins?ttning."
plus:
"Hej och tack f?r din recension. Det verkar som att du missat att n?mna varf?r casinot ?r s? d?ligt, f?rutom att du f?rlorade. Casinon har alltid en f?rdel gentemot spelare s? det ?r en vanlig situation p? alla casinon att en spelare f?rlorar ins?ttningen. Skriv en ny recension med mer information s? att den kommer att vara mer anv?ndbar f?r andra spelare. Tack f?r din f?rst?else."
Tyv?rr tog du det s? personligt, jag har inga problem med dig, jag str?var bara efter att h?lla anv?ndarbetyget opartiskt.
Har du m?rkt att du har skickat in 27 recensioner hittills best?ende av 24 g?nger 1-stj?rniga recensioner som proklamerar att kasinon ?r mer eller mindre en bluff eftersom du f?rlorade - allt ?r manipulerat?
Den sista verkar vara en f?lla, att bel?na samma casino med 5 stj?rnor f?r att ge dig bevis p? att bara bra recensioner ?r godk?nda - inneh?llande "LOL". Jag ser det som en ganska o?rlig situation. F?rst?r dock inte det personligen.
F?r att m?la bilden i sin helhet h?r: bara tv? g?nger har du bel?nat kasinon med 2 stj?rnor.
D?rf?r avvisade jag recensionerna utan n?gon konkret eller anv?ndbar information.
N?r det g?ller andra spelare tar vi ocks? h?nsyn till deras anv?ndarrecensionshistorik. I en ideal v?rld skulle ingen av dessa existera; f?r n?rvarande kan vi inte kontrollera varje spelare retroaktivt, s? vi g?r det l?ngs v?gen.
Det finns ingen personlig aspekt, vi saknar bara f?r n?rvarande tid att vara exakta ang?ende redan inskickade recensioner.
Hello there.
Allow me to mention here the reasons you got for those rejections.
"Hello and thank you for your review. It seems that you failed to mention why the casino is so bad, aside from the fact that you lost. Casinos always have an advantage over players so it's a common situation in all casinos that a player loses the deposit. Kindly write a new review with more details so it will be more helpful to other players. User reviews shouldn't serve as a revenge against casinos where you lost your deposit."
plus:
"Hello and thank you for your review. It seems that you failed to mention why the casino is so bad, aside from the fact that you lost. Casinos always have an advantage over players so it's a common situation in all casinos that a player loses the deposit. Kindly write a new review with more details so it will be more helpful to other players. Thank you for your understanding."
Sadly, you took that so personally, I have no problem with you, I only aim to keep the user rating unbiased.
Have you noticed you have submitted 27 reviews so far consisting of 24 times 1-star reviews proclaiming casinos are more or less a scam because you lost - all is manipulated?
The last one seems like a trap, awarding the same casino with 5 stars to give you proof only good reviews are approved- containing "LOL". I see that as quite a dishonest situation. Not getting that personally, though.
To paint the picture in full here: only two times you have awarded casinos with 2 stars.
Hence I rejected the reviews lacking any concrete or helpful information.
Regarding other players, we also consider their user reviews history. In an ideal world, none of those would exist; momentarily, we cannot check each player retroactively, so we do that along the way.
There's no personal aspect, we're just currently lacking the time to be precise regarding already submitted reviews.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
