'Consultation over the Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes board' blog discussion

Mat_P

Changing the name certainly tackles the real problem of this board.


Some of the vitriolical comments posted by the degenerate gamblers using this board illustrates the problem it can cause for the rest of MSE.

Best to close it down quickly Martin - could be real problems if more newbies are tempted in and left heplessly exposed to the high risk Cheltenham Festival.

hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk

There are additional problems here. You simply cannot compare the murky world of gambling where there is A LOT of fixing, inside information, money laundering, books that appear to be nothing more than a form of Ponzi schemes...

Add the complication of people on this board who have a big financial interest in the form of referral bonuses, and have their own, usually hidden, connections with some of the organisations involved.

Personally, I am amazed that it is still here on MSE.
Perhaps the respectable advertisers and affiliates who earn the money for MSE are starting to cotton on to what a can of worms they are associating their good names with, which is no doubt why it will be closed down.

And at this time of economic crisis, really? Diverting people who seem to be often rather ingenious from doing something productive into wasting time looking for gambling loopholes??

Come on MSE shut this down immediately.
You can tell from the scorn with which some posters talk about the other parts of MSE that you aren't actually earning any income from these people.

vey

As northernpunter had said, I fully agree with his opinion.

Moreover after reading some FB comments on Martin's blog, some people are just taking it to the extreme (Gambling is addictive and you will end losing money!)

debtfree1day

Gambling is a serious issue, and my family have suffered with the 'gambler' being highly intelligent and analytical in approach but ultimately becoming compulsive
I cant help thinking that the MSE inclusion ultimately legitimises gambling. I appreciate there are dozens of people who dont 'cross the line' into compulsion, but there are numerous gambling related forums and websites for those individuals who want to seek out gambling, this is different than having them on a website which is giving generic money guidance (including to those with gambling related debts)

JimmyTheWig

I haven't read all the comments and don't really use the board myself. (Sometimes I'll have a read as it can be interesting, but I haven't got the time to do it properly, so don't do it at all.) But I do have some suggestions...

1. Obviously it makes no business sense for MSE to employ someone with the required skills to take this board on. But would there not be enough competent, trustworthy volunteers who could be turned to in the event of a question of whether something is risk-free or not?

2. Would it work to keep it but keep it simple? I.e. anything that can't be seen as risk-free by the existing forum team is removed. That may mean that more complex risk-free tactics are removed, but keeping the basics would be better than keeping nothing, I would have thought.

3. Could a comment be added to each post (or maybe the first post in a thread, if they're the ones that generally suggest an offer) between the post and the user's signature saying "Remember that it is your responsibility to check what you are doing. Do not assume that <poster name> has read all the terms and conditions for you."

PatrickPower

hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk wrote: »

Come on MSE shut this down immediately. You can tell from the scorn with which some posters talk about the other parts of MSE that you aren't actually earning any income from these people.

Most people wanting GIOL shutdown appear to contribute very little to the MSE Forums (11 post by hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk).

Here's hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk post from 08-02-2011

I used to earn very good money at this game (and gave a tenth of my profits to charities). Thanks to the likes of this Jaco, and whoever else is encouraging too many people to crowd into the act, it's pretty meagre pickings now. Please can Jaco and others donate money to me for massive loss of earnings. And give some money to the charities that don't get so much from me nowadays (Oxfam will do).

Thanks.

Check it on this thread if you like: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/41027566#Comment_41027566

I think it's pretty clear why people like hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk want the forum shutdown. Greed and self interest.

I think it's fairly clear what has happened here, there has been a concerted effort by a number of users like hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk to complain constantly to the MSE Forum team about the GIOL thread in order to get it shutdown.

They've yanked Martin's chain and he's fallen for it big time. Sadly this whole debacle, is making him look more like a Money Saving Idiot than a Money Saving Expert.

He's been bullied and harassed into closing down GIOL by a very limited group of self interested parties. I thought he was all about standing up for the rights of his users. Plainly he just can't be bothered with the users on the GIOL forum.

So if you want a forum shutdown just get a group of friends together and complain about it every day!

Haven't seen much in the way of an update from the MSE Team either!

Sad times.

woodcroft

Shame on you hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk and your greedy ilk


Depriving other MSE-ers of the best opportunity on this site.


The damage is done. The golden goose has flown.

daaave

Lock the forum, but keep an updated list with links to other MB'ing forums.

http://youtu.be/MITyIQouufs

Former_MSE_Dan

PatrickPower wrote: »

I think it's fairly clear what has happened here, there has been a concerted effort by a number of users like hamskdakamskbreadnjamsk to complain constantly to the MSE Forum team about the GIOL thread in order to get it shutdown.

They've yanked Martin's chain and he's fallen for it big time. Sadly this whole debacle, is making him look more like a Money Saving Idiot than a Money Saving Expert.

He's been bullied and harassed into closing down GIOL by a very limited group of self interested parties. I thought he was all about standing up for the rights of his users. Plainly he just can't be bothered with the users on the GIOL forum.

So if you want a forum shutdown just get a group of friends together and complain about it every day!

Haven't seen much in the way of an update from the MSE Team either!

Sad times.

We receive reports from a wide range of users of that forum, some old, some new, some supportive, some wanting posts deleted etc. There is rarely a correlation between someone's post count/time on forum and their opinion about this board.

As has been said a couple of times now in the posts by MSE staff, no decision has been taken, and this is as a result of issues that proper users of that forum - of all ilks - have alerted us to. No outside influence is being exerted here - just as it never is for any decisions made about MSE.

This is a genuine consultation, and we are really grateful for those of you who have suggested constructive solutions to this (and those who have at least acknowledged our dilemma here - between allowing helpful discussion on the board vs protecting other users from losing out).

We have responded a number of times on this thread, and continue to monitor all the comments. It won't be a flash decision, it needs much consideration, and we will keep you updated as it goes along

Dan

jamesd

To try to better address one of Martin's major concerns I've started a Differentiate between risk and risk-free discussion. Please apply your expertise in this subject to help come up with some scales and ranges of risk that Martin can use to help he and his staff decide what they can and can't comfortably accept.

Here's the initial post but please discuss it in the new topic rather than this one because it has a much narrower focus than this more general discussion:

jamesd wrote: »

In Martin's consultation blog post he's cited this as his biggest concern:

"My biggest concern is that people could find incorrect info on there, and they’ll think that because it’s on MSE it must be OK – and may then damage their finances on the back of it. ... the fact we are now struggling to differentiate between risky and risk-free is a concern."

And also observed that:

"We also receive contradictory reports from our regular users, who live and breathe this sort of thing, about what is risky or not"

So it seems time to try to resolve one of his concerns: eliminating the disagreement between regular users about what is and isn't risky.

Now, that's strictly impossible because there are risks that a major UK bookmaker could go bust and be unable to pay out. So if he strictly insists on zero risk he'll close the board because he can always find some risk.

But between that zero risk and what he may consider to be unacceptable risk there are degrees of risk and there seems room for regular participants to try to agree on a scale of risk levels for various things that Martin could use to help better draw the line between what he is and isn't comfortable with.

What are those degrees of risk? To start, consider bookmaker insolvency risk:

Very low risk: major UK bookmakers under UK regulation.
Low risk: major UK bookmakers under foreign registration (Gibraltar, Malta say).
Relatively high risk: foreign new bookmakers with minimal contact information.

Please fill in the gaps and give Martin a range of options to choose between so he can tailor the risk to what he considers appropriate.

Now expand to other types of risk, notably:

1. A scale of complexity.
2. A scale of interests to disclose (if you're getting referrals you should be disclosing it, say, or if you're getting referral payouts you shouldn't be the person to initiate a discussion, and regardless you must always disclose interests).

Hopefully the end result may be the same sort of systematic analysis of types and controls of risk that exists in the mainstream investment area so Martin could decide that an offer that was complex and using a new non-UK bookmaker with minimal contact information was beyond his risk tolerance, while a low complexity offer from a major UK bookmaker is within it.

Martin or others, please do move the discussion if you think there's a better place for it. I think it's best kept apart from this one and better in the host board rather than this one but perhaps you'll disagree.