Photo: Jason Leung / Unsplash

The clause watch method

1 of 3 sweeps read · 24 contracts per sweep · 20 documents retrieved · 4 counted in no figure · No score

A register organised by company answers whether one operator is any good. A register organised by clause answers a harder and more useful question: whether the thing that just happened to you is normal. Somebody told their balance was voided cannot tell, from one set of terms, whether that is an industry standard or one company’s outlier. Reading the same clause across a whole register settles it on one screen.

How a clause is chosen

A sweep is worth running where three things are true at once: the clause decides whether somebody keeps their money, it is invoked often enough that people arrive already looking for it, and its drafting varies between companies enough that the comparison says something. A clause every contract writes identically is a fact about the industry, not a sweep.

3 sweeps are on the queue and 1 has been read. The queued ones are published with no findings rather than left off, because the shape of the section is itself a claim about what will be read.

How a sweep is read

The whole document is retrieved, not searched. Every clause on the subject is quoted verbatim, with the URL it was read from and the date, and the clause number where the document numbers its clauses. Nothing is paraphrased: the drafting is the finding, and a summary of a clause is an opinion about a clause.

Each record then carries four separate readings, kept apart because they answer different questions. Whether the terms prohibit the thing. What consequence the terms state. Whether that consequence is reserved to the company’s discretion or follows automatically. And whether the drafting distinguishes a person using a tool for privacy from a person using it to reach a service barred to them, which is the distinction almost every dispute turns on.

Consequences are recorded against a fixed vocabulary so that 24 contracts can be counted rather than described.

none-stated is a finding about a document that was read in full and attaches no consequence. It is never used for a document nobody could open, and the build rejects a record that tries.

The rule about a document that could not be retrieved

4 of the 24 contracts in the current sweep could not be retrieved: BC.GAME, Roobet, Duelbits and Coins.game. On those records every derived field is empty, no retrieval date is claimed, and the source column says the document was not retrieved rather than that the terms were read. They are counted in no published figure.

This matters more than it sounds. An unread contract once shipped carrying the token meaning the terms state no consequence, which rendered in the same cell, in the same words, as the operators whose terms genuinely were read in full and genuinely contain nothing. Two completely different findings, one rendering, on the page whose entire premise is that different kinds of nothing are different. A validator now fails the build on that state rather than a reviewer catching it.

The consequence for every ratio is that the honest denominator is the number of documents read. The current sweep reports against 20 read, of 24 operators on the register, and a figure quoted against the larger number understates by counting two contracts nobody opened as contracts that say nothing.

What a sweep establishes, and what it does not

A sweep establishes what 24 companies wrote down, on one subject, on one date. That is all it establishes. It is not evidence of what any of them does. A company with the harshest clause in the register may never have invoked it, and a company with no clause at all may close accounts for the same conduct under a general provision the sweep did not read.

10 of the 20 read contracts reserve the consequence to the company’s discretion, which means the clause states what may happen rather than what will, and the sweep cannot tell you which. A sweep is a map of the powers taken, not a record of the powers used.

Nothing in a sweep is advice about how to avoid a clause. The VPN sweep says so on its own page and declines to name a tool, an operator that fails to detect one or a route around a block, because a page that helped would be moving the consequence onto the reader and keeping the traffic. A self-exclusion register is handled in the same spirit, at responsible gambling.

Sweeps read the casino register today. The exchange and wallet registers record clauses of their own on amendment and geographic restriction, and no cross-register sweep has been published yet, so no figure here describes anything but casinos. Collected 2026-09-22.

Why there is no score

There is no score on a clause sweep and there is not going to be one until there is something to compute. A sweep has one subject and 24 rows. Ranking a company by one clause would say that the company with the mildest VPN drafting is the safest place to deposit, which nothing on this site supports and which the sweep is not evidence of.

A score is a claim that the things being compared differ along one measured dimension by a stated amount. Nothing in this register supports that claim, so a number here would be a measurement nobody made, dressed as one somebody did. The register publishes the fields instead and lets a reader weigh them, which is the part a single figure removes.

No Review, Rating or AggregateRating markup is emitted on any page in this section either, because none of those describes what is on the page.

How an absent value is written

Corrections

If an entry about a clause record is wrong, send the primary source that corrects it to the address on the contact page. A correction needs the document, not a request: a link to the clause, the register row or the page that shows the recorded value is not what it was on the date we read it.

Corrections are published with their date at corrections, and the original value stays visible rather than being edited away. A change to what an entry records about a company is logged at the change log on the day it is made. A register whose history can be rewritten quietly is not a register.

Commercial disclosure

CryptoGuardz holds commercial affiliate relationships with 3 of the 24 operators on the casino register, named in full at the disclosure page and named again on every page that carries one of them. Being paid through them is the intended model rather than a description of the current build: no outbound link here carries affiliate tracking yet. Commercial partners are read on the same terms as everybody else and are quoted against themselves where the clause says so, with the relationship disclosed in the same paragraph as the finding rather than only at the foot of the page. No commercial relationship is an input to anything computed on this site, and the build rejects a data file that tries to set a derived value by hand.

The data

The sweep is published as a CSV with every column, its row count and its known gaps at the data page, and the sweep itself is at the VPN sweep.