Olepset3 måneder siden
I agree with most of what people here write about the pros of this casino, except one thing: the bonuses can't always be wagered. Other than that, 0 complaints. The most important thing is that they process withdrawals of your winnings without any issues. Plus, there's a solid cashback
I agree with most of what people here write about the pros of this casino, except one thing: the bonuses can't always be wagered. Other than that, 0 complaints. The most important thing is that they process withdrawals of your winnings without any issues. Plus, there's a solid cashback
Hej Teiledo,
Tak for din falske anmeldelse, efter min mening. Det er ret mistænkeligt, at alle de angiveligt "positive" anmeldelser har en bronzevurdering. Mærkeligt, ikke sandt?
Uretfærdige og legitime gevinster blev beslaglagt eller konfiskeret af casinoet. Hvad siger I om min sag, hvis I overhovedet har undersøgt den?
Tak.
Hi, well, the complaint was closed the way I suggested yesterday.
The patient is a necessity and things go according to the abilities of the mediators, not mine for example.
The safety Index impact cannot always occur overnight, though, as far as I know; it's an automatically scheduled feature, usually scheduled for Wednesday midnight.
I agree this casino should be avoided and I hope no other casino will ever give you such troubles.
Tak for dit svar, Radka.
Desværre er der endnu ikke sket et fald i indekset, og jeg anmoder derfor udtrykkeligt om, at I undersøger, overvåger og gennemgår dette. Jeg vil gøre det regelmæssigt.
Tak.
Hej Teiledo,
Tak for din falske anmeldelse, efter min mening. Det er ret mistænkeligt, at alle de angiveligt "positive" anmeldelser har en bronzevurdering. Mærkeligt, ikke sandt?
Uretfærdige og legitime gevinster blev beslaglagt eller konfiskeret af casinoet. Hvad siger I om min sag, hvis I overhovedet har undersøgt den?
Tak.
Hello, to be honest, I do understand what makes you behave this way; on the other hand, you are in no position to challenge other people like this. Without proofs, it's rude and not in line with our guidelines. Therefore, kindly reconsider the way you communicate with others.
I hope from now on, we are on the same page. Other users, no matter their ranks, are not obliged to respond to "It's quite suspicious that all the supposedly "positive" reviews have a Bronze rating. Strange, isn't it?
Unfair and legitimate winnings were seized or confiscated by the casino. What do you say about my case, if you've even looked into it?
Thank you."
It won't be tolerated anymore.
It's a top casino among newcomers to the market!!!
Crypto deposits and withdrawals are convenient and much faster
Hej Radka,
Desværre deler jeg ikke din mening, og jeg vil gerne spørge dig om noget. Jeg ville sætte pris på et ærligt svar.
Du er på ferie og leder efter restauranter på Google. Du finder en med 20-30 anmeldelser, alle med 5 stjerner. Du læser anmeldelserne, og der står næsten altid:
Så kigger du på profilerne og bemærker, at mange anmeldere kun har skrevet 2-3 anmeldelser indtil videre. Du besøger restauranten og indser, at den slet ikke er, som anmeldelserne sagde, og at den var dårlig. Hvad synes du i det øjeblik? Har du stadig brug for beviser eller beviser for, at noget må være galt?
Tak.
Hej Spetneak,
Hvad gør dette casino til et topcasino? Jeg ville være interesseret i at vide, om du kunne uddybe.
Tak.
Hello,
I do understand why your own experience with the casino makes you suspicious. However, I need to draw a clear line here.
Other community members are under no obligation to respond to your questions or defend their own reviews simply because you personally doubt their authenticity. Likewise, you are not in a position to publicly accuse other users of posting fake reviews based solely on your assumptions.
Please keep in mind that forum discussions, user reviews, and the Safety Index are three separate parts of our platform, each with its own moderation process and purpose. What you can see as a forum user is only a small part of the overall picture.
Our team regularly reviews user reviews for authenticity, credibility, and compliance with our guidelines. There are many legitimate reasons why multiple reviews may appear within a similar timeframe or share certain characteristics, and these situations are assessed internally. For that reason, it is not appropriate to draw conclusions about other users or challenge them publicly based only on what is visible on the front end.
You are, of course, welcome to discuss your own experience with the casino and your complaint. However, questioning the integrity of other community members without evidence is not in line with our community guidelines.
Please consider this a final formal warning. Should this behavior continue, your forum access will be restricted.
Before anything else though, I'd like to say that I'm not the kind of moderator who looks for excuses to get rid of people simply because they ask uncomfortable questions or think critically. Quite the opposite. I appreciate users who are willing to analyze things and challenge what they see.
Since you've clearly invested quite a bit of time into your observations, I'd like to expand on the topic a little and share some context from our side. This isn't meant to convince you that you're wrong or to defend this particular casino. Rather, I'd like to explain how user reviews have gradually evolved over the past several years from the perspective of a team that works with them every single day.
After reading your analysis and the restaurant example you used, I believe you've also noticed how dramatically the way people write online has changed over the past few years. AI tools and text generators have become part of everyday life, and they are often used even by ordinary people who simply don't know what to write.
As someone who works with user reviews every single day, I can confirm what I've already mentioned before: positive reviews often sound very similar and, quite frankly, many of them feel artificial. However, that alone is still not proof that there wasn't a real person behind the keyboard.
It would also be fair to remember that the people posting those reviews usually know nothing about your personal experience with the casino. Their motivation for leaving a comment may be much simpler than you think.
It is quite common for casinos to occasionally ask their regular players to leave a review. That's simply standard industry practice. When someone enjoys playing there but doesn't really know how to express their opinion, they often borrow phrases they've seen elsewhere or simply ask ChatGPT to help them write something. As a result, many reviews end up looking generic or similar.
Of course, from the outside, this can look suspicious. But that's no longer unique to casinos. This is simply what reviews of almost anything look like today because writing habits and people's motivations have changed significantly.
This is also one of the reasons why forum posts, user reviews, complaints, and the Safety Index are treated as separate parts of our platform. User reviews themselves do not determine a casino's Safety Index—precisely because we understand their limitations and because no one can reliably judge someone's intentions from the final text alone.
Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, we live in a time when a genuinely valuable review that thoughtfully describes a player's experience has become incredibly rare. That doesn't mean, however, that a satisfied player cannot simply describe the ordinary things they appreciated: fast withdrawals, helpful customer support, enjoyable games, or a good cashback programme. Those are still perfectly legitimate experiences, even if they are not particularly detailed.
At the end of the day, none of us has a detector that can tell us what someone's true intentions were when they wrote a review. We can only assess what is actually written, together with the surrounding context, and apply the same moderation standards to everyone.
This is why, although I understand what you're trying to achieve, I see your recent activity less as helping the community and more as a personal mission against this particular casino. Unfortunately, that has led to publicly questioning other users and challenging the authenticity of their reviews based solely on assumptions.
So, just a wrap up: Other community members are under no obligation to justify or defend their own experiences because someone else finds them suspicious. If you genuinely believe that a review violates our guidelines, you're always welcome to share your toughts, and let us assess it. However, publicly accusing other users of posting fake reviews is not something we can allow, regardless of the circumstances surrounding your own complaint.
I hope this explains why wI 've asked you to stop doing so.
Tak for det detaljerede svar, Radka. Jeg forstår en del, og jeg følger dine regler så godt jeg kan, hvilket jeg har gjort indtil videre. Derfor forstår jeg ikke helt denne sidste advarsel.
Bare for at være helt klar: Jeg må ikke længere sende beskeder eller svare medlemmer for at spørge, hvad de præcist kan lide ved casinoet? Mine spørgsmål var oprigtigt ment som neutrale. Jeg vil virkelig gerne vide det, og jeg tvinger ingen til at svare eller overveje min oplevelse med casinoet.
Tak.
You are welcome. I respect your experience, buts no, that is not what I said.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking another member about their experience with a casino if your intention is to have a respectful and neutral discussion.
The issue is the context in which those questions are asked.
When you write statements such as "Thanks for your fake review" or publicly suggest that other members' reviews are suspicious because of their account status or because they don't match your own experience, your questions can no longer be seen as neutral. They become accusations that other users are expected to defend themselves against.
That is the behaviour I asked you to stop.
You are always welcome to discuss your own experience or ask others about theirs. What you should avoid is assuming that another user's review is dishonest based solely on your own suspicions, or drawing conclusions from whether they choose to reply to you.
To be equally honest with you, if I were a regular forum member and had read your previous posts, I probably wouldn't reply to your questions either. Not because there's anything wrong with being asked about my experience, but because the surrounding context would make me feel that whatever I said would simply be used to support a conclusion that had already been made.
That's why I keep coming back to the same point: context matters.
Tak for det hurtige svar, Radka.
Men hvis du ser nærmere efter, besvarer de heller ikke dine spørgsmål. Og I er alle her upartiske og uden kontekst.
Tak.
You're welcome.
Well, considering the overall context of this discussion, I don't think there's much point in comparing who replied to whom.
For now, though, let me simply thank you for all the energy, effort, and perhaps even patience you've invested in this discussion.
In my opinion, if you ever had to spend a few months moderating player reviews the way we do every single day, you could easily go nuts too. We certainly do from time to time. 🙂
That's probably the last, and the most honest, experience I'd like to share from my side.
Hej Radka,
Casinoets vurdering har ikke ændret sig til det værre? Hvad siger du til det? Jeg finder det fuldstændig uacceptabelt. Casinoet konfiskerede legitime gevinster og reagerede ikke på klagen.
Tak.
Og Radka, der er nogle vigtige oplysninger, du bør give videre til Samuel angående min klage, og han skal helt sikkert tage dem til efterretning. Casinoet har ændret sine bonusvilkår og -betingelser med 6.14!
Det står nu under 6.14:
6.14. Gevinster fra bonusmidler er også underlagt denne maksimale grænse.
Her er et skærmbillede, der viser, hvor dette punkt ikke var til stede:
Og her er et skærmbillede af, hvordan det ser ud nu med justeringen:
Dette viser tydeligt, at casinoet uretfærdigt og urimeligt har tilbageholdt mine gevinster!
Ændringsdatoen blev ikke ændret, på trods af at redigeringen blev foretaget! Den viser stadig 4. februar 2026! Dette er manipulation eller vildledning af vilkårene og betingelserne!
De vil sikre sig, at den uløste sag ikke har nogen negativ indvirkning. De vil have, at nye kunder ser, at klagen var ubegrundet, og at casinoet handlede korrekt! Derfor har de ikke ændret ændringsdatoen (seneste opdatering). De skjuler og tilslører den!
Kære Radka, hvilke yderligere beviser og beviser har du brug for? Jeg beder Samuel om at integrere dette i klagen med det samme og justere den i overensstemmelse hermed.
Hej Radka,
Casinoets vurdering har ikke ændret sig til det værre? Hvad siger du til det? Jeg finder det fuldstændig uacceptabelt. Casinoet konfiskerede legitime gevinster og reagerede ikke på klagen.
Tak.
Hello, the rating and complaints effects are automatically calculated so it may not be in line with your expectation. For details, though, every complaint is visible. Not sure whether you read the guide about complaints and their impact, but the basics are there. (Just in case you would like to take a look 👈👈)
The severity of the "problem" is expressed through the awarded black points, as I mentioned; it's pure math; otherwise, we would only classify the casino as simply good or bad, with nothing in between. It's a process; if the casino keeps acting this way, the drop will be more severe based on the disputed amounts and awarded blackpoints.
We have no other model available, I'm afraid.
De vil sikre sig, at den uløste sag ikke har nogen negativ indvirkning. De vil have, at nye kunder ser, at klagen var ubegrundet, og at casinoet handlede korrekt! Derfor har de ikke ændret ændringsdatoen (seneste opdatering). De skjuler og tilslører den!
Kære Radka, hvilke yderligere beviser og beviser har du brug for? Jeg beder Samuel om at integrere dette i klagen med det samme og justere den i overensstemmelse hermed.
In my opinion, you mistook me for a personal complaint assistant. However, I cannot speak on behalf of Samuel or the casino. I respect your opinion and experiences, but from where I stand, I have nothing else to add. The complaint remains unresolved, which means it still harms the casino's reputation.
Tak Radka for din feedback.
Kære fællesskab, jeg ville kort informere jer om, at CasinoGuru, eller rettere sagt min kontaktperson i min klage over Royalen Casino, endnu ikke har taget hånd om denne manipulation af bonusbetingelserne, som jeg finder uacceptabel og forkert. €22.500 lyder måske ikke som meget for ham eller andre, men det er det bestemt for mig, så denne sag fortjener højere prioritet.
Denne tilbagevirkende manipulation af bonusvilkårene uden at justere ændringsdatoen er yderst svigagtig og kriminel. Dette bør inkluderes i klagen, og indekset bør sænkes drastisk, hvis ikke reduceres til 0,0, hvilket resulterer i sortlistning.
Jeg ville sætte pris på eventuelle svar på dette. Jeg spekulerer også på, om der stadig er folk, der tror på de positive anmeldelser og rapporter.
Derudover har jeg nu kontaktet kendte spiludbydere og beskrevet denne sag til forskellige tyske og internationale spille- og casinofora, og jeg er nysgerrig efter at se, om de vil svare, og hvad deres mening vil være.
Især casinogrupper er under intens granskning. Jeg har erfaret, at det ikke er en velrenommeret affiliateside, som mange andre påstår at være, og at den udelukkende fokuserer på at generere provisioner. Dette forklarer den fuldstændige og fejlagtige sammenblanding og forvirring af casinoer, der er anført der, på tværs af forskellige udbydere med forskellige licenser og nogle helt uden licenser.
Jeg holder dig opdateret.
Tak.
Gratis faglige kurser for medarbejdere på online casinoer om bedste praksis, optimering af spilleroplevelsen og en fair tilgang til gambling.
En initiativ, vi har sat i søen med henblik på at etablere et globalt selvudelukkelsessystem, der giver sårbare spillere mulighed for at blokere deres adgang til alle former for onlinespil.
Du omdirigeres til casinoets website. Vent et øjeblik. Tjek indstillingerne, hvis du bruger software til annonceblokering.
