Online Casino

[Anonymous]

Sisko wrote:

That’s a good point, and it’s info I had considered including when I first thought of the site. I thought that maybe my review could count for 50% of the overall rating and everyone else’s could be the other 50%. In the end I just did it as is because I wanted to get launched, and it was taking too long already, but perhaps I could add a link for each site to a review by me section or something. The only problem is, I haven’t played at all of the sites (or even most of them), so it would be hard for me to be anything but full of sh** when I did my reviews. Thanks a lot for the feedback.

Patience is a virtue If you haven’t played at a site then know what you should do? Go play at it. You need to find out everything you can about the site, and be able to give the visitors a unique opinion. Don’t be lazy and just get excited about getting launched….it’s a lot better to wait a month and get a worthwhile site up, than it is to launch immediately with not much at all. And to be honest, a site entitled “pokersitesrated” where the webmaster hasn’t played at most of the poker rooms? That’s a big turnoff. Don’t mean to be harsh or anything, just giving my opinion.

I agree with kwblue; differentiate the boxes somehow. I’d focus more on the site reviews, make them your main focus. I’d also change the format of reviews completely, and make it a lot more easy to view. Looking in 6 different boxes just seems pointless.