Corrections and change log
Every substantive correction, with the page, what it said and what it says now. Typos and layout changes are not listed; anything that changed a claim is.
Transparency
- Corrections logged
- 19
- Latest correction
- 3 Nov 2026
- Pages named
- 18
- Unlogged changes
- 0
The log
- 3 Nov 2026Ban tracker and state pages
Connecticut and Montana were recorded as operator-exclusion states. Both have statutes: Connecticut's PA 25-112 (SB 1235), section 14 effective 1 October 2025, and Montana's SB 555, effective the same day. Michigan was recorded as an operator exit although the Gaming Control Board issued cease-and-desist orders in 2025. The register now counts ten statutory bans, two enforcement closures (Illinois, Michigan) and three operator exits (Idaho, Nevada, Washington).
- 3 Nov 2026Homepage, hub and state reference
The FAQ said eight states had passed explicit bans. The count is ten: Montana and Connecticut passed statutes in 2025 alongside California, New York and New Jersey, and five more states legislated in 2026. The homepage, the hub and the state guide now say ten.
- 2 Nov 2026States index and West Virginia page
The restricted-tier note said both audited brands accept all eight restricted states. Their current lists do not: Delaware and West Virginia are named by every documented list, and the other six restricted states by one to four of the eight. The note now gives those counts instead of the claim.
- 2 Nov 2026State coverage matrix
The page described seven documented brands and eighteen missing ones; the matrix actually holds eight and seventeen after the RealPrize list was added. The counts are now computed from the data instead of written into the copy.
- 2 Nov 2026Ban tracker
New page: the fifteen closed jurisdictions with their mechanism, instrument and effective date, plus the eight restricted states and the gap between each statute and the brand lists that name it.
- 2 Nov 2026Closed-state pages
The block for a closed state said the operators we audit exclude it. Stake.us's published list is from a terms version dated 10 July 2026 and does not name Oklahoma, so the sentence was wrong on that row. It now distinguishes a list that names the state from a statute that applies regardless.
- 2 Nov 2026Oklahoma state page
Added the effective date and the reason the state is on the page: SB 1589 took effect on 1 November 2026, and lists published before that date can still omit Oklahoma.
- 2 Nov 2026Sweepstakes casinos compared
New page. Nine brands in one table with the columns we could not verify left visibly blank, and an explanation of why a ranking is not published.
- 1 Nov 2026States index
The tier definitions described the audited sample rather than the market. Both audited brands accept all eight restricted states, so 'restricted' now names its three real causes instead of implying an operator split.
- 1 Nov 2026States index
Kentucky was listed as closed by enforcement. It is restricted: the attorney general sued and some brands remain. The closure list was corrected from sixteen entries to fifteen.
- 1 Nov 2026Homepage
The FAQ said nine states passed explicit bans. The state list names eight, so the FAQ was corrected and the open and restricted counts were added.
- 1 Nov 2026Operators
A caption said six brands were awaiting a terms audit. Nine brands are tracked and two are audited, so the number is seven.
- 1 Nov 2026Maine state page
The regulator link pointed at a URL that returned 404. It now points at the Gambling Control Unit's current address, and every standard state page links its regulator.
- 1 Nov 2026Guides index
The index described five guides. There are six, because the AMOE guide was published without updating the copy.
- 1 Nov 2026Sitewide titles
A truncation helper cut page titles at 57 characters, which produced an ellipsis in 21 titles. The helper was removed, the titles were rewritten to fit, and the SEO check now fails on a truncated title.
- 1 Nov 2026State pages
Twenty-nine paragraphs were duplicated verbatim between states. Each was rewritten so a page describes its own regulator, market and records rather than a shared template.
- 1 Nov 2026About
The page said the site had 'eighteen pages, not eighteen hundred'. It has 95 routes, and the sentence now says what the site does not publish rather than understating what it does.
- 1 Nov 2026Editorial policy
The AI section claimed we do not use AI to produce location pages while 51 jurisdiction pages were drafted with AI assistance. The policy now discloses that plainly.
- 1 Nov 2026Money hub
Expanded from a summary to a full account of where a balance sits, the four payout steps, state variation, taxes and dispute evidence.
What counts as a correction
A correction is a change to something a reader could have relied on: a number, a date, a state list, a regulator, a claim about what an operator publishes. Those are the entries above, and each one names the page so a reader can see whether the mistake affected them.
A maintenance change is everything else: a reordered section, a replaced stock photo, a layout fix, a link that moved to an equivalent destination. Those are not listed, because a log padded with them would be long and would tell a reader nothing about accuracy.
The distinction matters for a site like this one. A page that says a state is open when the statute closed it can cost a reader money; a page whose sidebar moved cannot. Only the first kind belongs here.
Why the log is public rather than internal
Most reference sites keep corrections private, on the theory that readers prefer a page that looks finished. The opposite is closer to the truth in a market this unsettled: a reader who can see that a state count was wrong in October and fixed in November knows the site is checking rather than asserting.
The log is also a constraint on us. An entry has to name the page and the claim, which means a correction cannot be reduced to a quiet date bump. If a change is too small to describe in a sentence, it is probably too small to list, and if it is too embarrassing to describe, it is exactly the kind of change this page exists for.
Two of the entries above are of that kind. Twenty-nine paragraphs were duplicated across state pages, and the editorial policy claimed something about AI use that was not true of the jurisdiction pages. Both were published as corrections rather than absorbed silently, and both are the reason the policy now says what it does.
How to tell whether a page changed
Every page carries a check date, and the sitemap carries the same date. If a page's claim looks stale against a regulator's site, the date tells a reader how stale it is: a page checked last month is a claim about last month, not a claim about today.
The date is deliberately not bumped for deploys. A page that was re-published without a content change keeps its old date, which means the date is a statement about checking rather than about activity. That is the opposite of the usual practice, and it is the only version that makes the date worth reading.
How this log works
A correction is only useful if a reader can see it. The editorial policy promises that corrections are published rather than quietly edited, and this page is where that promise is kept: each entry names the page, the claim that was wrong and the date the fix went live.
The list includes corrections that made this site look worse. The duplicated-paragraph entry is the clearest example: twenty-nine paragraphs were repeated between states, which is exactly the pattern this site criticises in others. It is listed because a log that only records flattering changes is a marketing document.
What is not listed: a date bump with no content change, a reordered section, a broken link that was replaced with an equivalent. Those are maintenance rather than corrections, and listing them would inflate the log without telling a reader anything.