Onestrolet Research  ·  Updated May 2026  ·  92 Casinos Ranked  ·  Zero Affiliate Links
Open to contributors

We publish people
with evidence.

Onestrolet publishes independent research from people who have something specific and documented to say about online gambling — not general takes, not promotional content, and not AI-generated articles with a human name attached.

If you have direct experience, verifiable data, or professional expertise relevant to casino safety, bonus mathematics, player rights, or responsible gambling, we want to hear from you.

What we publish

First-person reviews with specific documented outcomes (amounts, dates, reference numbers)
Data-driven explainers: wagering maths, house edge, provably fair verification methods
Investigative pieces: documented abuse patterns, licensing failures, regulatory gaps
Responsible gambling content: honest assessments of tooling, self-exclusion effectiveness, harm indicators
Jurisdiction-specific analysis: regulatory comparisons, player rights, enforcement case studies
Community-compiled evidence: documented player disputes with supporting correspondence

What we don't publish

Casino employees or contractors pitching coverage of their own or competing platforms
Affiliates writing reviews of casinos they earn commission from
AI-generated articles, spun content, or pieces that don't include direct personal evidence
Press releases, promotional copy, or 'news' about casino product launches
Opinion pieces unsupported by documented evidence or verifiable data
Anything written by someone with an undisclosed financial relationship to the subject

Disclosure requirement: All contributors must disclose any financial relationship with the subject they're writing about. This includes affiliate arrangements, employment, investor relationships, and personal financial stakes. Undisclosed conflicts of interest result in permanent exclusion from the contributor programme. We pay no commission and offer no referral arrangements.

Submit a pitch

Tell us about yourself and your idea

All fields marked * are required.

About you

Portfolio, published articles, Reddit posts, or any public writing. Not required but helps.

Contributor type *

Select the option that best describes your background. This shapes how we read your pitch.

Your pitch

Be specific. 'Casino review' is not a topic. 'How Winna denied my €3,000 withdrawal and what happened when I escalated to the regulator' is a topic.

What argument are you making? What evidence do you have? What's the structure? 150–400 words is fine.

Screenshots, transaction records, support ticket numbers, email chains. Describe what you have — you don't need to attach anything at this stage.

Submitting opens your email client with your pitch pre-filled.
We review all pitches within 5–7 working days.

What happens after you pitch

01

We read it

Every pitch is read by an editorial team member, not filtered by keyword. We review within 5–7 working days. If your pitch is outside our scope, we may not respond individually.

02

We may ask for evidence first

Before commissioning a review or investigation, we typically ask to see the evidence you described in your pitch. This is to verify your claims are documentable before either of us invests time.

03

Editorial standards apply

We edit for clarity, accuracy, and factual verifiability — not tone or opinion. We don't soften findings. If your evidence supports a strong conclusion, we publish the strong conclusion. You'll see any edits before publication.

04

No affiliate arrangements

We do not offer, and you should not expect, commission on signups, affiliate links within your content, or any revenue-share arrangement tied to the casinos you write about. Payment is a flat fee for accepted pieces, agreed before publication.

Familiar with our existing research?

The strongest pitches come from people who've read our existing reviews and can identify what we've missed, what's changed, or what a different vantage point reveals.