Forum
Comments:
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 09:41:34 AM UTC
Child friendly..?
Looks as if all the red ratings are from before the scorecard was introduced;
so I can't see the reasons behind their votes, or how many there is.All the green ratings are very recent, by only two people.
However, I fail to see how any gambling site should be labelled "child friendly"..?
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 10:01:26 AM UTC
Re: Child friendly..?
Looks as if all the red ratings are from before the scorecard was introduced
You have to remember that leaving a comment is still optional and relatively rare compared to giving a rating.
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 12:30:22 PM UTC
Ratings and comments
Sami: "You have to remember that leaving a comment is still optional and relatively rare compared to giving a rating."
Oops, you are right! (Mea culpa) Yes, I should have remembered that. But I still think comments makes sense. I rarely rate anything without explaining why. Partly because people might want to my reasons. Partly because much of what I've learned came from reading others reviews, not their ratings alone. (Dean from Siteadvisor as a good example).
Now that the site is debated, it would have been nice if all the red ratings had been explained. But there was nothing at all... ;-(
PS: Logicman, remember that comments are only plain text (plus links).
< c o d e > " < s t r o n g > l o a d < / s t r o n g > " < / c o d e > is only displayed as "l o a d".
Then again, I understand the mistake: it would be more 'logical' if the possibilities were the same everywhere. (At least italics should be allowed in comments; this would not disturb the overall layout at all...)PPS: Sami, I think there's a minor fault in "Compose tips":
Coded text used to show programming source code< c o d e > C o d e d < / c o d e >
At least I expected that "< c o d e >" would display "< s t r o n g >" as letters only - instead of executing the tag. (I had to insert spaces to make my examples work...) -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 12:32:00 PM UTC
I think there's a minor
I think there's a minor fault in "Compose tips"
Nope, the forum allows partial HTML, which means the
<code>tag is the actual HTML tag, not what you'd expect from a forum using BBCode. If you want to use tag names in your message, you can escape them (use < instead of < and > instead of >).Edit: Here's a list of HTML character entity references for all your special character needs. You can use those wacky Unicode characters too.
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 12:49:21 PM UTC
Thanks
Thanks for the very fast reply! And more thanks for the simple but elegant solution...
PS: <irony>Unfortunately I can't edit my post now, since you replied to it...</irony>
PSS: But how about italics in comments?
Imo, this would not disturb layout, only increase readability... -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 12:51:21 PM UTC
Re: Thanks
You can use the
<em>tag, like this. -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 12:59:00 PM UTC
Are you sure?
Just tested it: http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/bt.dk
Doesn't seem to work. Or am I mistaken again..? -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 01:00:35 PM UTC
Re: Are you sure?
I was talking about the forum, no tags are allowed in scorecard comments.
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 06:30:38 PM UTC
Thanks for the extended char possibilities
The title says it all...
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 05:20:13 PM UTC
Thanks, phantazm
Thanks, phantazm - I hadn't noticed the error.
There's a 'quick and dirty' way to show how to use codes, called nesting:
What you write is:
<strong> < <strong> strong <strong> < <strong>
What the reader sees is:
< strong >
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Protect and Surf. -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 10:14:03 AM UTC
Dangerous ?
Perhaps 'dangerous' is too strong a word.
How about 'non-html compliant'? How about 'dishonest'?
Not html compliant: merely highlighting the domain name: http://www.onlinecashmethod.com caused my browser to actually load that site's home page, which was not my intention.
Dishonest: onlinecashmethod.com, an obvious affiliate, is a cheaters' charter:
"If you happen to find another casinos in which our method works and hasn't been detected yet by the security systems, Please let us know at: contact@onlinecashmethod.com "Cheating at casinos is a criminal offence in some countries.
Sorry, what was the question?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Protect and Surf. -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 12:01:19 PM UTC
'dishonest'?
The site has been awarded with the seal of http://www.GPWA.org for honesty and with the "safe and fair seal" of http://www.ecogra.org/ .And you call that dishonesty??? http://www.time2win.eu has noting to do with the http://www.onlinecashmethod.com ... Your ratings are so unfair...
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 05:42:39 PM UTC
Not unfair at all!
The Gambler says: "www.time2win.eu has noting to do with the www.onlinecashmethod.com"
In which case, why was the URL for http://www.onlinecashmethod.com displayed so prominently at the top of the http://www.time2win.eu home page as a live link?
edit: The affiliate URLs are variable, not showing the same every time you visit the site. There is nothing wrong with that, in itself.
I note that the site onlinecashmethod has changed its wording. That's a step in the right direction.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Protect and Surf. -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 02:02:20 PM UTC
Fox guarding the chickens
"GPWA can neither guarantee a site's compliance nor accept responsibility or liability for any lapse in compliance"This GPWA admits itself that it cannot ensure a site's compliance, so what good is it? That's like saying
"We think this is OK, but we're not sure . . . and by the way, don't sue us if it's not OK". Consequently, the"responsibility"goes back to the site itself . . . which is like having the fox guard the chickens. Trying to anchor your legitimacy on this GPWA"certification"is pretty much meaningless. -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 02:46:59 PM UTC
More fox...
BobJam, you have a point there! But where did you read it?
Its not on the frontpage, but I think I can guess why. ;-)
While looking, I found this:According to their own TOS they don't like to be quoted:
"In no case shall anyone "cut and paste" any content
from GPWA, Verbatum, at any time."
http://www.gpwa.org/terms_of_use.aspHmm, how about 'fair use'..?
-
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 03:38:20 PM UTC
Read it in the very first post here by that gambling guy/gal
Hey phantazm,
It;s not off the site, but rather was posted here in that very first post by andwnirs.
Interestingly, based on what you quoted from the GPWA TOS, that guy
VIOLATEDthe TOS of the very organization that was quoted. Hmmmmmm . . . says a lot about the site, don't you think?? -
- on Tue 30 Sep 2008
- 03:47:19 PM UTC
Oh there...
BobJam: "says a lot about the site, don't you think??"
It does! And I do...
Perhaps they should consider including this line:
"GPWA can neither guarantee its own compliance nor
accept responsibility or liability for any lapse in compliance"
;-)
www.time2win.eu a dangerous site???
http://www.time2win.eu a dangerous site??? How that is possible???
The GPWA Seal of Approval is awarded to gambling portal websites that meet our standards and that are affiliated with approved GPWA members who abide by the GPWA code of conduct.
The seal has been awarded to the website
time2win.eu
affiliated with approved GPWA member
time2win
http://www.gpwa.org/members/member_details.asp?id=25626
The Seal of Approval linked to this page signifies that the operator of the site is a current GPWA member in good standing who has agreed to abide by strict criteria designed to ensure that the highest ethical standards are upheld at all times and in all situations.
An investigative team headed by GPWA's Fair Gaming Advocate has determined that this site:
* Is managed independently of the online gambling websites it provides information about or promotes.
* Respects and upholds copyright standards.
* Does not send spam email.
* Does not use malicious search engine optimization techniques such as posting spam-like comments in forums and interactive blogs.
* Does not promote or display pornography.
* Provides consumers with information extending beyond banner advertisements and links.
* Acts professionally and respectfully in its business activities.
While websites bearing the GPWA Seal of Approval are monitored to ensure ongoing compliance with membership requirements, GPWA can neither guarantee a site's compliance nor accept responsibility or liability for any lapse in compliance. If you believe this site is not in compliance with any of these Seal of Approval requirements, please report your observations directly to the GPWA's Fair Gaming Advocate. All reports are promptly investigated.
http://www.GPWA.org
http://www.time2win.eu has been awarded with a eCogra "safe and fair" seal.For more information, please go to http://www.ecogra.org/
AND YOU CALL THAT DANGEROUS ?!?