Northline / Reader information
Rating methodology without invented scores
A number should be the end of an investigation, never its substitute.
Prepared 11 November 2026
A proposal, not a scored result
The proposed framework assigns licence and identity evidence 30%, offer-terms clarity 25%, payout evidence 20%, safer-gambling tools 15% and support evidence 10%. These are editorial design weights, not measured operator performance. No scoring rubric has been calibrated or approved for publication.
Licence and terms
Identity checks must reconcile the legal entity, trading name, domain and relevant register entry. Terms review must capture minimum deposit, wagering basis, eligible games, expiry, withdrawal restrictions and customer eligibility. A headline bonus is not a substitute for this record.
Payout and safeguards
Payout evidence needs the payment method, test conditions and dates, distinguishing operator processing from bank settlement. Safer-gambling and support reviews should record which tools and channels were actually examined, without promising that their presence prevents harm.
Completeness is a gate
A future score may only be considered after every criterion has a current source and review date, a documented scoring rubric and an independent editorial review. Missing evidence must not be treated as average performance or redistributed across other criteria. A licence check must remain a threshold decision rather than something an attractive offer can outweigh.
The result for this pilot
Licence identity, activity and domain evidence is displayed. Commercial fields remain unverified. No criterion has been scored, no overall score exists and no star rating or rating structured data is emitted. The comparison table exposes the gaps rather than calculating a number from them.