How We Review: The Criteria, the Boundary, and the Disclosure
This site writes about bonuses and wagering terms, which is an area where vague wording is the norm and specific wording is rare. It would be hypocritical to be vague about our own method, so here it is: the checks, the boundary of what can be known from outside an account, and what a commercial relationship buys. JILIBB is an independent guide: not a casino, no deposits, no games, no scores, no rankings. 21+.
The criteria
| Criterion | What a careful reading establishes | What it cannot establish |
|---|---|---|
| Licence disclosure | That a regulator and licence identity are named in text and appear on that regulator's own published list on the date checked | That the licence is current today, or that holding one makes an operator good to deal with |
| Payment rails | Which wallets and transfer networks the cashier names, and whether the site and app agree | Speed, fees or limits, which are the operator's and published in its cashier |
| Terms clarity | Whether the wagering requirement, expiry, maximum bet during a bonus and withdrawal conditions can each be found quickly | Whether the terms are fair, only whether they are findable |
| KYC rules | Whether identity requirements are published before deposit and which documents are listed | How the policy is applied to an individual account |
| Complaint route | Whether a named internal escalation and a named external one exist and are reachable without asking an agent | Whether using either one resolves anything |
| Responsible-gaming tools | Which limits, reminders, cool-off and exclusion options exist, and whether they are self-serve | Whether a limit holds once set, which is only visible from inside |
| Support channels | Which channels exist, with what stated hours, and whether each is operator-controlled | How well anyone answers when money is at stake |
| App distribution | Whether the operator is honest about how installation works and whether it publishes mirrors | Whether the file you were handed is the one it published |
Bonus terms get the most attention here because this site writes about them most, and because they are the one area where a careful reading genuinely settles the question. Either the wagering multiple, the expiry and the maximum bet are stated, or they are not.
The boundary
Everything published is readable. Nothing inside an account is. That line decides what appears here as fact and what appears as a claim, and the wording tells you which: the terms state means you can open the same document, while the operator says means we read an assertion and could not confirm it.
- Readable: licence claims, terms wording, cashier rails, support channels, complaint routes, install practice, which limit tools are offered
- Not readable from outside: payout speed, fees, minimums, account decisions, how support behaves under pressure
- Not knowable by anyone: that a game is due, that a system beats a house edge, that a session says anything about a published RTP
No scores, and no best-of table
A score implies a measurement and a weighting that nobody outside an operator possesses. We can report that a wagering requirement was stated in the first paragraph or buried in a PDF; converting that into a number and standing it beside a payout speed nobody here has tested would be decoration. Ranked operator tables fail the same test: when the inputs are claims, the ranking 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 signs up later. That funds the site. It buys no wording: not an adjective, not a position on a page, not the removal of a criticism, and never a preview before publication.
The test to use on any guide, this one included: find the sentence that is unflattering about the thing being linked to. If no page can produce one, you are reading an advertisement dressed as a review.
Revisions
A page is rewritten when what it describes changes: a licence claim appears or vanishes, a bonus term is reissued, a rail is dropped, a channel closes. The date shown is the date of that check. Evidence that something here is factually wrong is a reason to rewrite it, and reliably the only one.
Standing disclosures
- A guide standing on its own, not an operator: no deposit is taken, no game dealt, no money held.
- Nobody here has tested a withdrawal or claimed a bonus with an operator's money.
- No individual is offered here as the authority behind a judgement, because a byline nobody can check proves nothing.
- Operator-specific numbers belong in the operator's cashier and terms.
- Adults only, 21 and over, and the cost mounts the longer it runs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why no ratings out of ten?
Because a rating implies a measurement and most of what is knowable about an operator from outside is a claim. Findings are written as sentences and the weighing is left to you.
Are your links paid?
Some may be partner links that pay a commission after a sign-up. They change no wording, order or criticism, and no operator sees a page before publication.
Why will you not publish wagering numbers for an operator as fact?
Where the operator publishes them, we quote them and point you at the document. Where it does not, we say that too. What we will not do is fill the gap with a figure we cannot source.
Who writes these pages?
The criteria are published instead of a byline, and the right test is whether every claim traces to a document you can open yourself.
Can you help me with a withheld bonus or balance?
No. This site has no access to any account. The route is operator support, then your e-wallet or bank through their own app, then the regulator, then the cybercrime authorities.