This policy sets out how RustGamblingReviews researches, writes, checks and updates what we publish. It applies to every review, ranking, guide and bonus code page on the site.
Independence
Our editors decide what to cover, how to score it and what to say. The sites we review do not see a review before it is published, cannot ask for changes to scores or wording, and cannot pay to be included, ranked higher or left out of a comparison.
We test with deposits we make ourselves, through the same public link a reader would use. We do not accept free balance, skins or gifts from a site in return for coverage. If a site offers any, we turn it down.
Affiliate terms are never discussed in connection with a score. If a partner raises a review or a ranking during a commercial conversation, the answer is the same every time: the method decides, and the method is public on our how we rate page.
Who writes and checks our content
Every site review is written by our lead reviewer, Daniel Kovač, who also runs the tests. Every review is then fact-checked by Elin Sandberg, our payments and security editor, before it goes live.
Guides carry the name of the editor who wrote them, and a second editor reads each one before publication. Guides on odds, game modes and responsible gambling are usually written by Tomás Herrera.
Fact-checking
Before a review is published, the fact-checker compares it with the test notes and with the site itself. That check covers:
- founded year, restricted countries and KYC policy
- deposit and withdrawal methods, the minimum deposit and any fees we found
- the bonus code, what it gives and the terms attached to it
- the list of game modes, and whether each one is provably fair
- all six criterion scores and the overall score calculation
Facts about Rust itself, Steam trading and provably fair systems are checked against primary sources, such as Steam Support and Facepunch, wherever possible. When we cannot confirm a detail, we leave it out or tell you what to check yourself.
We do not publish invented figures. If a page uses a number to illustrate a point, it says so.
Updates and last tested dates
Each review shows a last tested date. That is the date of the most recent full test, carried out using the steps in our rating method. It is not the date someone last fixed a typo.
Listed sites are re-checked every month, and again after any major change or a credible player report. When a re-check changes a fact or a score, we update the review and the ranking follows. Small edits that do not change the meaning of a page, such as repairing a broken link, do not reset the last tested date.
Guides are updated when something in Rust, on Steam or on the sites changes in a way that affects the advice. Bonus codes are checked as part of each monthly re-check, and a code that stops working is removed or replaced.
Corrections
We get things wrong sometimes. When we do, we fix it quickly and say so.
- Minor errors such as a typo, a broken link or a formatting slip are fixed without a note.
- Factual errors such as a wrong fee, a payment method a site does not offer or an outdated code are corrected. Where the error could have affected a reader's decision, we add a dated correction note to the page.
- Errors that affected a score are corrected, the score is recalculated, and the change is noted on the review along with the old and new figures.
To report an error, use the contact page or email contact@rustgamblingreviews.com. Tell us which page, what is wrong and, if you can, how you know. We look at every report, including reports from site operators, but we only change a page when the evidence holds up.
Use of AI and automation
All reviews on RustGamblingReviews are written and checked by our editors. Scores come from our own testing and are set by a person, not generated by software.
We use ordinary software for routine jobs, such as spell-checking, finding broken links and noticing when a site's terms page has changed so we know to re-check it. No page goes live until an editor has read it and signed it off.
Conflicts of interest
Our main conflict is commercial, and we disclose it openly in our affiliate disclosure: we earn commission when readers sign up through our links or codes. On revenue share deals, that commission grows when referred players lose. We manage this by publishing the scoring method, tying the order of the rankings to the scores, and being plain about the house edge in every guide where it matters.
The team also follows these rules:
- No editor may hold a stake in, work for or take payment from a site we review, outside the published affiliate arrangements.
- Editors do not promote gambling sites on stream or social media using balances supplied by a site.
- If an editor has a personal connection to someone working at a site we cover, we say so on the relevant review.
- Sponsored content, if we ever publish any, will be clearly labelled and kept out of the rankings.
If you think we have fallen short of any part of this policy, tell us. We would rather hear it from a reader than find it ourselves six months later.