How We Review: Eight Criteria, and What Each One Is Worth
Not all evidence is worth the same, and a review that treats a published terms document and a trust badge as equally meaningful is not a review. So this page lists the eight criteria used here along with how much weight each deserves, then states plainly where the evidence runs out. JILICC is an independent guide: not a casino, no deposits, no games, no scores, no rankings. 21+.
The criteria, weighted
| Criterion | How much weight it deserves | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Terms clarity | High | It is a direct test of a document anyone can open: either the wagering multiple, expiry, maximum bet and withdrawal conditions are findable, or they are not |
| Licence disclosure matched to a regulator's list | High | A claim checked against an independent list is the strongest external evidence available, though it remains a dated snapshot |
| App distribution practice | High | Publishing mirror lists or hiding how installation works is behaviour, not marketing, and behaviour is visible |
| KYC rules published before deposit | Medium | The policy is readable; how it is applied to an account is not |
| Payment rails named in the cashier | Medium | Useful for knowing what is offered, silent on speed, fees and limits, which belong to the operator |
| Complaint route published | Medium | Publication is checkable, resolution is not, and an unpublished route is a real finding |
| Responsible-gaming tools offered | Medium | Their existence is visible; whether a limit holds is only visible from inside an account |
| A licence badge image, an award graphic, a testimonial | None | All three are images. They are evidence of a design decision and nothing else |
The last row is the one worth keeping. A great deal of what looks like proof on casino pages is a picture, and a picture is not a check.
Where the evidence stops
- Readable from outside: licence claims, terms wording, cashier rails, published channels, complaint routes, install practice, which limit tools exist
- Not readable: payout speed, fees, minimums, verification decisions, how support behaves when money is at stake
- Not knowable at all: that a game is due, that a system beats a house edge, that a session proves anything about a published RTP
Where a sentence on this site reports a claim, it says so: the operator states, the page asserts. Where it reports a document, you should be able to open that document and read the same thing. Those two forms of words are never interchanged.
Why there is no score
A score implies a measurement and a weighting. We have published the weighting above because it is a judgement worth exposing, but we have not pretended to the measurement. Reporting that a wagering rule took ten minutes to find is a finding; converting that into a number and standing it next to an untested payout speed is presentation. There is also no ranked operator list here, because ranking claims ranks marketing.
The disclosure
Some outbound links on this site may be partner links, which can pay a commission if a reader follows one and later signs up. That funds the site and belongs in the method rather than in a footer. It buys nothing in the text: no adjective, no placement, no deleted criticism, and never an advance look at a page.
The test to apply to any guide, this one included: find the unflattering sentence about the thing being linked to. If no page can produce one, it is an advertisement.
Revisions
A page changes when the thing it describes changes: a licence claim appears or vanishes, terms are reissued, a rail is dropped, a channel closes. The date shown is the date of that check. Evidence that something here is wrong is a reason to rewrite it, and reliably the only one.
Standing disclosures
- An independent guide rather than an operator: no deposit taken, no game dealt, no balance held.
- No cash-out has been attempted and no payout stopwatched by anybody writing here, and no page says otherwise.
- There is no personality offered as the authority behind a verdict, because a byline you cannot verify settles nothing.
- Operator-specific numbers belong in the operator's cashier.
- Adults of 21 and over only, and the longer it runs the more it costs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which single check tells me most about an operator?
Terms clarity. Whether the wagering multiple, the expiry, the maximum bet during a bonus and the withdrawal conditions can each be found quickly is a direct test of a document you can open yourself, and it is the one check nobody can spin.
Do licence badges count as evidence?
No. A badge is an image. What counts is a named regulator and licence identity in text, checked against that regulator's own published list.
Why no score out of ten?
Because a score implies a measurement we do not have. The weighting is published above so you can argue with it, but findings stay as sentences.
Are your links commercial?
A few may be partner links that earn a commission once somebody signs up. Not a word, a position or a criticism moves because of it, and nothing is shown to an operator in advance.
Can you help me with a withheld withdrawal?
No. There is no account access here and no mechanism for moving funds. The sequence is operator support, your wallet provider or bank from inside their application, the regulator, then the cybercrime authorities.