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

Anonmouse

Looking at the suggestions so far, I would have to say that a sub-forum seems like the cleanest solution - with extra warnings, restrictions to access of some sort if deemed neccessary.

Simply splitting the board along the lines of safe, simple, risk free offers with the main, trusted, established bookmakers and anything else confined to the sub-board (Obviously still with the total exclusion of anything not risk free).

Along with the greater push at self-regulation and potentially some assistance for JM I think we should all be able to get along just fine.

JimmyTheWig

HeimRoller wrote: »

Where do we draw the line between what is morally right and morally wrong.

I think the point is that we need to draw the line where the MSE team understand the risks.
They have people who understand the risks of the credit card they suggest and, presumably, decided those risks were worth the benefit of telling people about it.
They don't have people who understand the risks of some of the more complicated matched betting scenarios.

Anonmouse

Please can you confirm the official MSE stance on an official member of staff learning the technique - It does seem a little strange to "own" the largest matched betting community probably in the world and not even understand the basic concepts.

CountryLad wrote: »

Givenmy above view of the importance of the board in helping people out of a holee.g. when they lose their job in the middle of the current recession, I wonderwhy do you not have people on your teams who haveexperience in this. The stuff in GIOL isn't rocket science, it's justexperience (and by the very nature of the board many of it's members just don'thave that experience). If you recognise the value of GIOL, and you should, thenyou know that you need to have that experience on your team. There are manyways in which MSE towers could achieve that.

duchy wrote: »

Frankly if Martin can'tbe bothered tasking staff to investigate matched betting by trying it with anopen mind and reporting back then all this discussion is a waste oftime..........or he's more concerned with his own image and less concerned withgenuinely helping people. Ah well MSE had its good years when the ethos wasappealing but seems like those days are gone and money is talking (in all thewrong ways)

woodcroft wrote: »

Nominateany employee who can read and use Excel, and spare a couple of hours a day tolook into this properly as part of their job.

Howlong's this consultation? I'll give £200 out of the profits I have earned fromthis site as a starting float for said nominee.

I'llhave back 25% of profit made after 4 months.




Inthe meantime, let's hear on this thread from anyone who's made a net loss as a result ofthis board please.

JezR wrote: »

Theonly difference appears to be that you consider you have staff who are expertin other areas, but not that of bookmakers offers (not gambling as we haveestablished that isn't the purpose of the board). It appears your decision isnot to seek this expertise - which is mainly maths.

Ed_Zep

darloscot wrote: »

As with Ghost_2005, I also started a little over a year ago. I have made about £6k, with a few errors along the way. That was from a £200 starting point with help from the forum and the tools that are so kindly shared.

That's really good going!

On the subject of the forum, it's a real dilemma. On the one hand, there are people who understand it and are supplementing their incomes almost totally risk-free, on the other, people who aren't reading the FAQs or becoming involved in gambling, either through not following the procedure correctly or becoming addicted.
I've not seen anything else on the web that has such an impartial and helpful guide to the matched betting process. If it goes, it'll be over to affiliate sites. Nothing wrong with them but they're not going to be as impartial.

woodcroft

^ That's the management's dilemma.

Close it, and force MSE followers to less regulated information

or

Keep it, but clean it up a bit and have some more moderation.


What's is going to be? And when?

Roger_Rampant

I don't mind it being hidden so that only registered MSE users can see it, but it would be a pity if "political correctness" deprived people of good advice about one potentially lucrative way to make extra money.

RebekahR

Anonmouse wrote: »

Looking at the suggestions so far, I would have to say that a sub-forum seems like the cleanest solution - with extra warnings, restrictions to access of some sort if deemed neccessary.

Simply splitting the board along the lines of safe, simple, risk free offers with the main, trusted, established bookmakers and anything else confined to the sub-board (Obviously still with the total exclusion of anything not risk free).

Along with the greater push at self-regulation and potentially some assistance for JM I think we should all be able to get along just fine.

Prehaps if this was to happen then new users would need to have made a certain amount of posts/been mbing for a certain amount of time before being able to have access to the sub forums? I have to say I am really struggling with this too. There is sooo much content on here that beats other sites by miles as it is sooo easy to read and follow. And people are very quick to help you if you are genuine. I have worked up a float of £4k from £75! £75 I put in from one of my weekly wages that I had saved up when I was doing part time work and was struggling to find fulltime work. It is NOT a quick fix it is similar to a job. You have study, train yourself, and then put it all into practice. Another option which is probably going too far ... but how about a beginners forum where they need to answer some questions and senarios from the guide. To show their understanding before being aloud entrance. It's one of those where do we stop things really. As it does come down to the individual. I came in and saw the bright red warnings from MSE about it not being risk free. It was a clear as a bell to me. I read it and heeded it. If others havent read and heeded then surely thats their fault if they make a big loss?! Tuff times! I would say keep it but redesign. There is too much wealth of knowledge here to loss.

woodcroft

As has been raised on a GIOL thread (which you won't have read) - why announce this [STRIKE]cull[/STRIKE] consultation on your open blog where it's obvious the readers haven't a clue about this board (apart from seeing the first word) ?

Why not chat to us over on GIOL about your concerns first?

And why the silence now?

meher

May be it was a big mistake letting Tim, your BG, one of the finest, if not the finest BG this site has ever had, go - he was extremely resourceful and the right person to manage the posters and place. Now it has got out of hand. At least that is how it seems, I could be wrong. I don't think it is so difficult to enforce rules and at least pretend that it is all legislated and the rest of it - it is all about creating an illusion that it is managed well and then be mature enough to leave it with the players.

But the name has to change, the image downsized big, BIG time.

At the moment it not only looks like an exclusive gambling board (big mistake) but also looks quite fetching. Another thing that can be done is by having a moderator for the board sponsored through links. But then there was a huge uproar when mse ran a trial. Problem boils down to users wanting far too much for free. That is selfish, sorry. I strongly believe this board should do only something that fetches ample revenue - that's the work load they take on and we expect, for no cost to ourselves. I like this board for the integrity it has and for the socialist values it pursues and never takes eyes away from the goal which is money saving ad consumer empowerment. Why be distracted by ongoing risks and issues that might effect hard earned reputation.

thelawnet

meher wrote: »

May be it was a big mistake letting Tim, your BG, one of the finest, if not the finest BG this site has ever had, go - he was extremely resourceful and the right person to manage the posters and place. Now it has got out of hand. At least that is how it seems, I could be wrong. I don't think it is so difficult to enforce rules and at least pretend that it is all legislated and the rest of it - it is all about creating an illusion that it is managed well and then be mature enough to leave it with the players.

Agreed, he was very good. What exactly happened to him?

At the moment it not only looks like an exclusive gambling board (big mistake) but also looks quite fetching. Another thing that can be done is by having a moderator for the board sponsored through links.

This is quite risky IMO. Editorial judgement is compromised by affiliate payments. There are plenty of websites where people receive financial compensation from gambling firms, and it does affect things, a lot.

Problem boils down to users wanting far too much for free. That is selfish, sorry. I strongly believe this board should do only something that fetches ample revenue - that's the work load they take on and we expect, for no cost to ourselves.

Not really sure what you mean.

As a matter of general principle, information on the internet is available for free.

MSE earns ample revenue, the gambling board, not so much. There are a few gambling sites that have experimented with charging people for access, but it doesn't really work, you just end up with sharks who don't want to share with their fellow sharks. Besides which, the revenue that can be raised is only a few thousand per year, an irrelevancy for a site like this.

I like this board for the integrity it has and for the socialist values it pursues and never takes eyes away from the goal which is money saving ad consumer empowerment.

Socialist values?

This site generates countless millions in revenue each year. I don't really see that offering financial advice is a socialist value. It's a successful brand providing useful content, but it's no more socialist than Google.