Editorial policy, funding and corrections
You should know who is telling you this and what they get out of it. Here is the whole arrangement, without euphemism.
How this site makes money
Affiliate commission. When a reader follows one of our links to BoroJeet and registers, we are paid by the operator's affiliate programme. You pay nothing extra, and your terms as a player are identical to those of someone who arrived by typing the address directly.
That arrangement creates an obvious incentive to write flattering things. We deal with it in two ways. First, disclosure: every page carries a visible note next to the first link. Second, and more usefully, we publish the facts that cut against our own interest — the BDT 25,000 daily payout ceiling, the below-average independent safety score, the operator-friendly bonus clauses, and our view that many readers are better off declining bonuses entirely. A site that only tells you the good parts is not being paid differently from us; it is just spending its credibility faster.
What we will not publish
- Invented figures. No made-up bonus amounts, RTP percentages for specific games, payout timings or promo codes. These change constantly, and a number that was true once is worse than no number at all. Where a figure matters, we point you to the place inside the platform where the current value lives.
- Fabricated reviews or ratings. No invented user testimonials, no star ratings we did not collect, no review schema representing scores that do not exist.
- Promises about outcomes. No systems, no guaranteed strategies, no framing of gambling as income. Where a product claims otherwise — Aviator predictors being the obvious example — we say plainly that it is a scam, even though that costs us traffic.
- Manufactured urgency. No countdown timers, no "3 people are claiming this now", no fake stock or expiry pressure.
- Content aimed at under-18s. No cartoon styling, no school themes, no framing that would appeal to children.
- Copied text. Everything here is written for this site.
Where our facts come from
Three tiers, and we try to be explicit about which one any given claim sits in.
| Tier | What it covers | How we present it |
|---|---|---|
| Independently verifiable | Licence number and issuer, operating company, launch year, safety index, published limits, payment methods, provider count | Stated directly, with the source named |
| Operator-published | Minimum deposit, game categories, supported sports, support hours | Stated with attribution to the operator, since we cannot independently confirm it |
| Variable | Bonus sizes, promo codes, processing times, RTP of individual games, fees | Never given as a fixed number — we explain the mechanism and tell you where to read the current value |
The third row is the one most affiliate sites get wrong, and it is the most common reason a reader ends up feeling misled by a page that was written in good faith two years ago.
What we are not
We are not the operator. We have no access to any player account and cannot open, close, credit, unlock or investigate one. We do not process payments. We cannot recover lost funds or influence a pending withdrawal. Anyone contacting you claiming to represent this site and offering any of those things is attempting a fraud — please ignore them.
We are also not lawyers. Nothing here is legal advice, and the legality of online gambling in Bangladesh is a genuinely restrictive area governed by the Public Gambling Act 1867 and related legislation. Deciding whether to use any platform, and bearing the consequences, is yours alone.
Updates and corrections
Every page carries a "content last checked" date in the footer. We revisit the verifiable facts periodically and after any material change we become aware of — a licence status change, a new payment method, a change to published limits.
If something here is wrong, tell us and we will correct it and say that we did. That applies equally to readers, to the operator, and to competitors. We would rather be corrected than be confidently wrong in public.
Would we write this the same way if we were not paid when you sign up? Where the answer is no, the sentence gets rewritten. That is not a claim of sainthood — it is just the only standard that makes a site like this worth reading.