ban online casino streamers

[Slotplayer]

This is what was said on the very first page:

U dont have a clue 

how the eff is £10,£20 spins etc responsible gambling?

get a grip

Lots of videos about doing that (and some more!!). Most of which are without links.

Is that OK to be shown? Or only without links so the addicts (according to some) can continue to watch it to satisfy their needs (according to some)

[asmeister]

22 hours ago, Ban online casinostreaming said:

@ruho79 sorry i dont understand your reply, Please explain ? Isnt this free speech and your still here so want to engage in a conversation ? I really dont mind if you have a problem with me at all just dont get involved if you dont want to, Peace man. 

You're playing some champion of freedom of speech, when effectively your agenda is the complete opposite 

 

you don't like freedom of speech, you loathe it 

[Marcossvon]

Is this a sticky or non sticky thread? What’s the wagering?? 

[TechnoJoe]

44 minutes ago, Marcossvon said:

Is this a sticky or non sticky thread? What’s the wagering?? 

haha, 35x standard lol

 

[Huggehugg]

44 minutes ago, Marcossvon said:

Is this a sticky or non sticky thread? What’s the wagering?? 

This is a sticky bonus with 555x wagering and max cashout is 2x your initial bet Kappa

[Lokus]

Slotplayer u dont deny the meaning of my last post, but Im Guessing its hard to understand kontext for you, since you only see things in black or white.

but i realized you have no real input in this topic / subject and for that no intrest for me , i wont comment anything from you further on, and i wish u the best pushing those links of yours?

[TechnoJoe]

10 hours ago, RyanMcSplooger said:

I fail to see how this guy is a troll when we are on a pro streamer forum and he has the support of a number of people. Take a look around on some of the comments of these videos and realise he's not alone in his thoughts.

The only ones who actually agree with you are pro streamers who are actually the minority. The general public wouldn't agree with addicts promoting casinos and they would not agree with people making money off others (gambling addicts) losses in such a non transparent way. 

A failure to understand who actually watches these videos is your downfall. It's a big circle of addicts. These videos are porn for gambling addicts and the makers want you to lose as much as possible if they are on a rev share based business model. 

 

 

Several aspects of this thread make me believe this is a troll post.

 

He stated from the outset that he has engaged authorities already, yet despite asking, there is no evidence of this - until i see a copy of correspondance already sent before the start of this thread i maintain its a troll, or at best, complete bullshit.

Who cares if he is alone in his thoughts or not - i disagree with his thoughts 

Why is anything a pro streamer does, or who is watching them my downfall - this is a nonsensical statement. I watch the vids, I am not an addict - unlike you, I would not presume that everyone that watches them is an addict, nor should you.

You should stick to your childish collusions to 'dislike' streams and videos and let adults decide what they do with their own time. 

What rev share/busines model they are on is their business.  Your business is your business, mines is mines.

 

 

[TechnoJoe]

also, whay are people active on a casino streaming form if they hate casino streamers - seems odd, reeks of attention and jealousy - back to Minecraft pls kids.

 

 

[TechnoJoe]

1 hour ago, ruho79 said:

You're playing some champion of freedom of speech, when effectively your agenda is the complete opposite 

 

you don't like freedom of speech, you loathe it 

Freedom of speech advocate who is anti freedom of choice and action - rofl

[RyanMcSplooger]

25 minutes ago, TechnoJoe said:

Several aspects of this thread make me believe this is a troll post.

 

He stated from the outset that he has engaged authorities already, yet despite asking, there is no evidence of this - until i see a copy of correspondance already sent before the start of this thread i maintain its a troll, or at best, complete bullshit.

Who cares if he is alone in his thoughts or not - i disagree with his thoughts 

Why is anything a pro streamer does, or who is watching them my downfall - this is a nonsensical statement. I watch the vids, I am not an addict - unlike you, I would not presume that everyone that watches them is an addict, nor should you.

You should stick to your childish collusions to 'dislike' streams and videos and let adults decide what they do with their own time. 

What rev share/busines model they are on is their business.  Your business is your business, mines is mines.

 

 

I have engaged with the UKGC, ASA and Gamcare regarding this subject matter in the past. Proof can be shown if needed as well as a telephone call that states they are actively investigating this. 

Anyone who followed my previous videos knows what I've been doing. The OP could be doing the same.

The only one being childish is yourself. Look at my previous comments and tell me where I'm childish.

[someguy123]

This is an interesting topic, clearly dividing gamblers view if streamers or casinos have any responsibility for the alarming growth of problem gamblers. 

!No need to Read(if you agree that Casino Streaming have monetary incentives and are dependent on casinos)! 
Well some of you might now point out that the Casinos are the problems but not the streamers. You need to realize that streamers fully depend on Casinos to continue their streaming, they are not getting massive sub counts nor donations on twitch and couldn't make a profit streaming casino games without affiliate programs and daily bonuses from casinos. 

Someone might now point out that this streamer doesn't have any affiliate program nor takes any daily bonuses from casinos. Well then that streamer either doesn't have a viewer base or for some reason promote one of the fastest growing addictions for free. That would be insane if you ask me.

LeoVegas bought the majority(51%) in this site(Casinogrounds) for 4.5 Million Euros(1.5 Million of that deal will only be paid out if revenue goals are met in January 2018, but as LeoVegas states themselves they are  confident that Casinogrounds will hit those goals), that puts it to an evaluation of 9 million euros. This site was made on the foundation of top streamers on twitch and big hits youtube videos. Casino Streams are big business and I don't care if some of the streamers doesn't make their fair share.

!Jump to here!

The original poster states that a ban on casino streamers is a requirement to slow down the growth on gambling addiction and also limiting it. 

Especially the statement that casino streams would add to the growth of gambling addiction have been questioned in this thread. A point have been made that big hit videos on youtube and casino streams on twitch are not easily stumbled upon. While there is a truth to that statement one can easily be introduced to these streams and videos thru a third party(A friend perhaps) or see the casino section on twitch and curiously take a gander on what is going down in that section. 

If we instead ask ourselves the simple question "would there be faster growth with streaming/big hit videos or would the growth be the same without it?", does the knowledge that its hard for a first time internet user to navigate themselves to Big hit videos really matter? The answer to the question is undoubtedly, Casino Streams and big hit videos does add to the growth of Gambling addiction. If you somehow think it doesn't, then you are in denial. Every day businesses are making videos that they hope will go viral and be shared, they doesn't just hope that people will somehow navigate with the correct google search to their newly produced advertisement. 

The second part would a ban limit gambling addiction, this one is not questioned. Here the blame is instead moved to the gambling addict, the gambling addict is weak because he cant stay away from his addiction. This is not an uncommon view on gambling addiction but it is interesting that people who thinks and expresses this opinion rarely would say this about any of the other big addictions. With the exception of sugar, people who are fat only have themselves to blame(am i right? If you think I am read a book on sugar addiction). 

If a drug addict tries to quit drugs and we would read that they got pestered by their dealer on their way to work(radio), on their phone, in their mail and when they are home(Tv, email and the internet in general). All with the same message "Free drugs!" or "buy drugs and get more drugs free!". Wouldn't we feel like there is some injustice done to that person? But yes this isn't a perfect analogy because drugs are illegal and is by all accounts a stronger addiction than anything else. 

An alcoholic maybe, faces some of the same struggles as a gambling addict in some(most?) countries. Alcohol is readily available in stores, pubs, restaurants and a given at any social event. If an alcoholic wants to get clean that person needs to go to lengths of self control and eliminate things in their life that most of us take for granted. However I do believe most countries have more regulation toward alcohol and is better prepared to help someone that is struggling. I'm not sure on this but I do feel like there is an easier step to login at a casino and start depositing money than going out and getting alcohol. Not much of a difference but I feel its there.

!The important part here!

With all that said I am of the belief that a persons freedom to pursue her own interests is something we should protect and even accept interests that might be considered damaging, but not to a cost that is unacceptable to that person or our society. 

I simple think if businesses get knowledge of a serious problem within their market, they should take the appropriate actions to self-regulate that problem. Governments should not intervene to hastily with regulations, that could lead us to a dangerous heavy handed censorship of the peoples right to choose their own interests. 

If a business instead uses that knowledge to feed the problem for monetary gain the government should regulate that market, and if the government was forced to intervene the regulation should be forceful and vigilantly enforced. As a punishment but also as a warning to other markets.

The casino trade isn't in its cradle, they should have come together years ago to create a one button self exclude option for all casino games for any person that wanted to use that option. They shouldn't target gambling addicts and use the tools that they have created to milk every last borrowed penny out of them. Yes this is true, Casino makes most of their profit on gamblers they know are addicts.

Casino streamers are not at fault for what the casinos does, they have little say in this and I do believe every single one of Casinogrounds streamers are genuine when they say they started this as a hobby. Now it has grown and now you could see a point of trying to regulate it. How could casino streamers help?

They could use their position and leverage towards Twitch and youtube together with everyone that thinks there should be an option to opt out from having the ability to view big hit videos on youtube or casino streams on twitch. 

A petition with a statement that we want viewers to be given the option if their account should be able to search and watch gambling related content, and also that you aren't able to view Gambling related content without creating an account. 

(Now I know some of you might try to throw this suggestions out because of loot boxes, but as of now no government does yet view this as gambling. I'm sure they in the near future will but casino streamers have no responsibility for this.)

Sorry for the long post, if you made it this far: Have a cookie!

 

 

 

[someguy123]

After rereading my post I am afraid people will get hung up on the word leverage in the last part. Please understand this is not a statement that casino streamers would have a major leverage towards either twitch or youtube. I mean any leverage that streamers or customers at twitch and youtube might have. 

[Slotplayer]

6 hours ago, Lokus said:

Slotplayer u dont deny the meaning of my last post, but Im Guessing its hard to understand kontext for you, since you only see things in black or white.

but i realized you have no real input in this topic / subject and for that no intrest for me , i wont comment anything from you further on, and i wish u the best pushing those links of yours?

My reply to your post is pretty clear.

As to no real input in this topic. Not real for you because it disagrees with your agenda.

I previously made the effort to listen, went into live streams and made adjustments to my Youtube and Twitch channels following feedback within that stream and another discussion on this forum.

I will leave it for the reader to conclude whether I see things black or white only.

[Slotplayer]

3 hours ago, someguy123 said:

This is an interesting topic, clearly dividing gamblers view if streamers or casinos have any responsibility for the alarming growth of problem gamblers. 

!No need to Read(if you agree that Casino Streaming have monetary incentives and are dependent on casinos)! 
Well some of you might now point out that the Casinos are the problems but not the streamers. You need to realize that streamers fully depend on Casinos to continue their streaming, they are not getting massive sub counts nor donations on twitch and couldn't make a profit streaming casino games without affiliate programs and daily bonuses from casinos. 

Someone might now point out that this streamer doesn't have any affiliate program nor takes any daily bonuses from casinos. Well then that streamer either doesn't have a viewer base or for some reason promote one of the fastest growing addictions for free. That would be insane if you ask me.

LeoVegas bought the majority(51%) in this site(Casinogrounds) for 4.5 Million Euros(1.5 Million of that deal will only be paid out if revenue goals are met in January 2018, but as LeoVegas states themselves they are  confident that Casinogrounds will hit those goals), that puts it to an evaluation of 9 million euros. This site was made on the foundation of top streamers on twitch and big hits youtube videos. Casino Streams are big business and I don't care if some of the streamers doesn't make their fair share.

!Jump to here!

The original poster states that a ban on casino streamers is a requirement to slow down the growth on gambling addiction and also limiting it. 

Especially the statement that casino streams would add to the growth of gambling addiction have been questioned in this thread. A point have been made that big hit videos on youtube and casino streams on twitch are not easily stumbled upon. While there is a truth to that statement one can easily be introduced to these streams and videos thru a third party(A friend perhaps) or see the casino section on twitch and curiously take a gander on what is going down in that section. 

If we instead ask ourselves the simple question "would there be faster growth with streaming/big hit videos or would the growth be the same without it?", does the knowledge that its hard for a first time internet user to navigate themselves to Big hit videos really matter? The answer to the question is undoubtedly, Casino Streams and big hit videos does add to the growth of Gambling addiction. If you somehow think it doesn't, then you are in denial. Every day businesses are making videos that they hope will go viral and be shared, they doesn't just hope that people will somehow navigate with the correct google search to their newly produced advertisement. 

The second part would a ban limit gambling addiction, this one is not questioned. Here the blame is instead moved to the gambling addict, the gambling addict is weak because he cant stay away from his addiction. This is not an uncommon view on gambling addiction but it is interesting that people who thinks and expresses this opinion rarely would say this about any of the other big addictions. With the exception of sugar, people who are fat only have themselves to blame(am i right? If you think I am read a book on sugar addiction). 

If a drug addict tries to quit drugs and we would read that they got pestered by their dealer on their way to work(radio), on their phone, in their mail and when they are home(Tv, email and the internet in general). All with the same message "Free drugs!" or "buy drugs and get more drugs free!". Wouldn't we feel like there is some injustice done to that person? But yes this isn't a perfect analogy because drugs are illegal and is by all accounts a stronger addiction than anything else. 

An alcoholic maybe, faces some of the same struggles as a gambling addict in some(most?) countries. Alcohol is readily available in stores, pubs, restaurants and a given at any social event. If an alcoholic wants to get clean that person needs to go to lengths of self control and eliminate things in their life that most of us take for granted. However I do believe most countries have more regulation toward alcohol and is better prepared to help someone that is struggling. I'm not sure on this but I do feel like there is an easier step to login at a casino and start depositing money than going out and getting alcohol. Not much of a difference but I feel its there.

!The important part here!

With all that said I am of the belief that a persons freedom to pursue her own interests is something we should protect and even accept interests that might be considered damaging, but not to a cost that is unacceptable to that person or our society. 

I simple think if businesses get knowledge of a serious problem within their market, they should take the appropriate actions to self-regulate that problem. Governments should not intervene to hastily with regulations, that could lead us to a dangerous heavy handed censorship of the peoples right to choose their own interests. 

If a business instead uses that knowledge to feed the problem for monetary gain the government should regulate that market, and if the government was forced to intervene the regulation should be forceful and vigilantly enforced. As a punishment but also as a warning to other markets.

The casino trade isn't in its cradle, they should have come together years ago to create a one button self exclude option for all casino games for any person that wanted to use that option. They shouldn't target gambling addicts and use the tools that they have created to milk every last borrowed penny out of them. Yes this is true, Casino makes most of their profit on gamblers they know are addicts.

Casino streamers are not at fault for what the casinos does, they have little say in this and I do believe every single one of Casinogrounds streamers are genuine when they say they started this as a hobby. Now it has grown and now you could see a point of trying to regulate it. How could casino streamers help?

They could use their position and leverage towards Twitch and youtube together with everyone that thinks there should be an option to opt out from having the ability to view big hit videos on youtube or casino streams on twitch. 

A petition with a statement that we want viewers to be given the option if their account should be able to search and watch gambling related content, and also that you aren't able to view Gambling related content without creating an account. 

(Now I know some of you might try to throw this suggestions out because of loot boxes, but as of now no government does yet view this as gambling. I'm sure they in the near future will but casino streamers have no responsibility for this.)

Sorry for the long post, if you made it this far: Have a cookie!

 

 

 

Some interesting points.

For me a lot stems from frustration. We have been here before and as I said in my previous post, listened and made adjustments. The concensus last time was that streaming videos are OK but streamers were not clear that they earned money from it and didn't promote responsible gambling. Adjustments were made regarding this.

You said that streamers would not get donations and subscriptions without affiliate programmes and casino bonuses. During one of the previous live streams by PaulD all those against streamers were more than happy for a streamer to just get donations instead of affiliate income. In other words, the streamer is still generating income off the back of gambling material, albeit via a different means.

I have a feeling here that those against streamers are against streamers making money off the back of it under the pretence to look out for problem gamblers. They are not concerned about streamers that don't have affiliate links (a reference was made to RockNRolla who was applauded for it). But it doesn't stop the gambling addict watching Paul and putting that £100 in he really didn't want after seeing him hit big live on his non affiliate stream.

There is already a lot of regulation regarding affiliation. Streamers (as well as web site affiliates) need to comply to ASA standards. Affiliates have to comply with the casino's affiliate terms and conditions. With a casino being directly responsible for the action of their affiliates and with the UKGC and ASA recently taking action, the casinos will quickly close an affiliate account if it breaches any regulations.

The "anti streamers community" need to be very clear what they exactly want but amongst that community there is a lot of division and disagreement. As a streamer you make adjustments, get good feedback regarding this for the goal posts to then suddenly move. And then people are wondering why our subsequent reactions are a little defensive.

[TommyBhoy]

@Slotplayer In my opinion there is no need to have casino streamers at all.  To me they do more harm than good. I also think a bookmaker should not be allowed to advertise on tv or radio.  Its the fact that gambling addiction is getting worse and worse everyday.  Not sure of the numbers but the UK has to be one of the worst in the world.  I am against any advertising by bookmakers or casinos anywhere not just via live streams.  Adverts and links do 1 thing only! Draw in punters who LOSE money.  Everyone knows bookies/casinos are there they dont need it put in front of them every day.   

Your comment

And then people are wondering why our subsequent reactions are a little defensive

more like childish with people like slotspinner making wild statements then going in the huff, jeez its a discussion with decent points on both sides

@Slotplayer can you please clear this up, is this statement true and the way it works with affiliates? this was made by slotspinner, You are happy to defend others streamers so please inform us as slotspinner refuses to clarify this rubbish he posted.  He treats us as if we are idiots.

3.1 We rely on players losing for income - No. The structure of most deals make it possible to earn when EVERY player is winning.

 

[Slotplayer]

It is called a Hybrid deal

[Slotplayer]

2 hours ago, TommyBhoy said:

@Slotplayer In my opinion there is no need to have casino streamers at all.  To me they do more harm than good. I also think a bookmaker should not be allowed to advertise on tv or radio.  Its the fact that gambling addiction is getting worse and worse everyday.  Not sure of the numbers but the UK has to be one of the worst in the world.  I am against any advertising by bookmakers or casinos anywhere not just via live streams.  Adverts and links do 1 thing only! Draw in punters who LOSE money.  Everyone knows bookies/casinos are there they dont need it put in front of them every day.   

Your comment

And then people are wondering why our subsequent reactions are a little defensive

more like childish with people like slotspinner making wild statements then going in the huff, jeez its a discussion with decent points on both sides

@Slotplayer can you please clear this up, is this statement true and the way it works with affiliates? this was made by slotspinner, You are happy to defend others streamers so please inform us as slotspinner refuses to clarify this rubbish he posted.  He treats us as if we are idiots.

3.1 We rely on players losing for income - No. The structure of most deals make it possible to earn when EVERY player is winning.

 

You criticise Slotspinner going in a huff when you did the very same on the first page of this topic telling Nicola she didn't have a clue when she arguably is more clued up regarding responsible gambling than me and you put together.

[asmeister]

6 hours ago, someguy123 said:

If a drug addict tries to quit drugs and we would read that they got pestered by their dealer on their way to work(radio), on their phone, in their mail and when they are home(Tv, email and the internet in general). All with the same message "Free drugs!" or "buy drugs and get more drugs free!". Wouldn't we feel like there is some injustice done to that person? But yes this isn't a perfect analogy because drugs are illegal and is by all accounts a stronger addiction than anything else. 

An alcoholic maybe, faces some of the same struggles as a gambling addict in some(most?) countries. Alcohol is readily available in stores, pubs, restaurants and a given at any social event. If an alcoholic wants to get clean that person needs to go to lengths of self control and eliminate things in their life that most of us take for granted. However I do believe most countries have more regulation toward alcohol and is better prepared to help someone that is struggling. I'm not sure on this but I do feel like there is an easier step to login at a casino and start depositing money than going out and getting alcohol. Not much of a difference but I feel its there.

Not that I disagree with most of the things your post mentioned, but this isn't a perfect analogy because of the reasons you stated, it's because it's incorrect.

How is a casino streamer pestering you? He/she isn't, he/she is providing a service that you have to actively seek up. It's like scolding a drug dealer for pestering you and forcing an addiction on you, when you spend a lot of time and effort locating one for service, if you wish to discuss it from an addiction point of view.  

If you want to change predatory advertising, take it up with the casino groups that condone affiliates that spam anonymously and without consent, or the TV company (MTV) that allows pretty much 100% of advertising to be casino advertising, or your respective government which allows gambling in every corner of your respective country.

[someguy123]

55 minutes ago, ruho79 said:

Not that I disagree with most of the things your post mentioned, but this isn't a perfect analogy because of the reasons you stated, it's because it's incorrect.

How is a casino streamer pestering you? He/she isn't, he/she is providing a service that you have to actively seek up. It's like scolding a drug dealer for pestering you and forcing an addiction on you, when you spend a lot of time and effort locating one for service, if you wish to discuss it from an addiction point of view.  

If you want to change predatory advertising, take it up with the casino groups that condone affiliates that spam anonymously and without consent, or the TV company (MTV) that allows pretty much 100% of advertising to be casino advertising, or your respective government which allows gambling in every corner of your respective country.

I think you misunderstood me, I never claimed that the streamer was. My point was that the argument "Gambling addicts are weak and only have themselves to blame" is hard to maintain when you look at the gambling industries intrusive advertisements. Pretty much on point with your last sentence, of course governments will have to step in and regulate because the industry itself are not willing and might not be able to with new casinos popping up every day.

[Slotplayer]

9 minutes ago, someguy123 said:

I think you misunderstood me, I never claimed that the streamer was. My point was that the argument "Gambling addicts are weak and only have themselves to blame" is hard to maintain when you look at the gambling industries intrusive advertisements. Pretty much on point with your last sentence, of course governments will have to step in and regulate because the industry itself are not willing and might not be able to with new casinos popping up every day.

Online casinos do pop up every day. But how many of those are not licensed by the UKGC? What can Government do about those? Very difficult when said casinos are not operated within the UK let alone have a UK license.

At least genuine streamers direct customers to legit regulated casinos rather than some clip joint set to put obstacles in the way when it comes to withdrawal time.

[someguy123]

13 minutes ago, Slotplayer said:

Online casinos do pop up every day. But how many of those are not licensed by the UKGC? What can Government do about those? Very difficult when said casinos are not operated within the UK let alone have a UK license.

At least genuine streamers direct customers to legit regulated casinos rather than some clip joint set to put obstacles in the way when it comes to withdrawal time.

Well that part didn't have anything to do what happens inside the casinos but about casino advertisement, I don't know if its the same in every country. I live in Sweden and here gambling ads are everywhere, I do not own a TV but whenever I watch at a friends house or family it seems that close to 50% of all ads are gambling related. 

I do know that the UKGC are somewhat successful in making the industry "self"-regulate(Hard to call it self-regulation when most of the obvious solutions are met with unwillingness and delays)  and that some of it also comes to benefit gamblers in other countries. Casinos do however seem more than happy to contain those "regulations" to the UK if they are not met with any pressure in other countries.

When I use the word government I am talking about all of our governments, they will work independently from one and another but many of them are facing the same problems. I think an extensive collaboration with the UKGC would be beneficiary to any other country because of the work they have put into this and the experience they hold.

[SuperSmask]

17 minutes ago, someguy123 said:

Well that part didn't have anything to do what happens inside the casinos but about casino advertisement, I don't know if its the same in every country. I live in Sweden and here gambling ads are everywhere, I do not own a TV but whenever I watch at a friends house or family it seems that close to 50% of all ads are gambling related. 

I agree that ads are absolutely insane here in Sweden and Denmark as well. That is something that needs to be looked into. Unfortunately they are financing all of the major sporting events across the globe. Without sponsors everything would be more expensive. But like you said, those adds are out of hand. I think almost everyone will agree on that.

[someguy123]

6 hours ago, Slotplayer said:

Some interesting points.

For me a lot stems from frustration. We have been here before and as I said in my previous post, listened and made adjustments. The concensus last time was that streaming videos are OK but streamers were not clear that they earned money from it and didn't promote responsible gambling. Adjustments were made regarding this.

You said that streamers would not get donations and subscriptions without affiliate programmes and casino bonuses. During one of the previous live streams by PaulD all those against streamers were more than happy for a streamer to just get donations instead of affiliate income. In other words, the streamer is still generating income off the back of gambling material, albeit via a different means.

I have a feeling here that those against streamers are against streamers making money off the back of it under the pretence to look out for problem gamblers. They are not concerned about streamers that don't have affiliate links (a reference was made to RockNRolla who was applauded for it). But it doesn't stop the gambling addict watching Paul and putting that £100 in he really didn't want after seeing him hit big live on his non affiliate stream.

There is already a lot of regulation regarding affiliation. Streamers (as well as web site affiliates) need to comply to ASA standards. Affiliates have to comply with the casino's affiliate terms and conditions. With a casino being directly responsible for the action of their affiliates and with the UKGC and ASA recently taking action, the casinos will quickly close an affiliate account if it breaches any regulations.

The "anti streamers community" need to be very clear what they exactly want but amongst that community there is a lot of division and disagreement. As a streamer you make adjustments, get good feedback regarding this for the goal posts to then suddenly move. And then people are wondering why our subsequent reactions are a little defensive.

About subscriptions and donations, what I said was that when it comes to casino streams they are not making money the conventional way as other streamers thru subscriptions and donations but are instead dependent on affiliate programs and casino bonuses to maintain all those costly streaming sessions. 

What you then have to ask yourself are the streamers allegiance to their viewers or those casinos. When it comes to these situations where you find yourself in the middle of two interests and you are dependent on both the truth is that your allegiance often are divided and somewhere in the middle. As in the case with High Roller, it wouldn't get such a positive review and played frequently by many of the streamers with overly positive opinions unless it became a partner with a favorable deal with Casinoground. But I am also sure that Casinoground and their streamers wouldn't promote it as they did if they had any suspicion that High Roller wasn't a top tier online casino. It goes hand in hand. 

@Slotplayer I do agree with you that some in this thread are not sincere  and I find it amusing how people goes on crusades against people instead of big business interests. Happens all the time, people don't take any action against big business but when a small actor like an online casino streamer happens to make money then by god we shall burn that part of the business down. 

Of all the problems in this industry casino streamers should not be first on anyone's list, if it should be on that list at all. There are so many other problems this industry needs to tackle first, but they have shown again and again that they are not capable of doing so, our governments will eventually have to step in.

[RyanMcSplooger]

I find it laughable the current crusade against FOBTs which are seen as the UKs worst enemy because of bet size allowed and the frequency someone can spin on roulette etc. Actually to a compulsive gambler the online world of gambling is far more damaging. At least these machines which generate a random number similar to online roulette have caps on the amount that can be bet on a single spin. No such limitations are in place online. 

Streamers use these as a scapegoat to divert attention away from the dark side of online gambling. You can bet thousands every spin online but only a hundred in the bookmakers. 

The criticism for TV advertisements is also laughable considering the streamers are advertising unregulated content for hours on end and in many cases it's not fully explained that they are advertisements. The whole community stinks and just divert blame elsewhere. TV adverts have to be shown beyond the watershed and last a few seconds. Streamers advertise casinos with crazy bet stakes to a vulnerable portion of the gambling community for hours. There's no regulation at all and the little that is supposed to be adhered to isn't. 

Pressure should be put on the gambling commission and Gamcare etc to change this and not the streamer who has no interest in cutting their income to help addicts. 

Truth is that the reason why new casinos exist and are promoted is because the addicts have self excluded from the big players. New casinos like high roller really offer nothing different, it's just a fresh site where addicts can deposit and lose again. 

Streamers and their fans will argue that they offer another chance to get a bonus. These bonuses are extremely unfavourable and I would interested to see how many people actually cash out after taking one. Little to none I assume. This is verified by the fact you have to actually opt out of some of these bonuses and I have personally had to plead with live chat for a considerable time to get them removed.

If you're from the UK then you should use someone like William Hill, Betfair or Skybet. No verification needed and fast withdrawal times. If you want a slot specific site then use Casumo. The hundreds of other casinos are there to lure in those who self exclude.

[Slotplayer]

You are saying online gambling is more damaging than fobts but finish your post with online casino recommendations. Surely you should tell people not to gamble online full stop?