All your entertainment things must have an external limiting feature, agree?

[peter0425]

Yes I do have things that can limit my addiction to any things that describe it as an addiction. First I have my pets, one way of getting pre-occupied that will consume much time keeping away from getting addiction but still have some time to get entertain but not really getting addicted to something. Another way that feel like I should not get addicted for example in gambling was my wife. Literally she is the manager in our house and obviously the law maker and has over power over my rights. Well, I can't argue to it because you know it is very difficult to win an argument against women because that is their specialty.

Or better that whenever you wanna play,make sure that Wifey is around to check you if already Lose the limit funds so you need to stop playing.
it sounds awkward but we need guidance in gambling because this is addicting and really hard to control by one self .
Let people around us be the instrument for us not getting deeper in this supposedly for entertaining purpose.

Good suggestion, you should find someone that can help you not to be addicted to much in gambling addiction. It's not awkward because your relationship and family are on the line once you get addicted on gambling. A character of an individual can also change and can affect his approach to his family so it's better to have someone beside you where you're doing stuff like gambling. If you have a tolerance on getting addicted then it's fine since you can control yourself especially the emotion.

Yes mate because being a former gambling active i must say that experiences teaches me about that if you want to really stay safe,
be with someone that you follow and respect whenever you gamble
because in this case,the chance of extending the play after the budget being loss will be preempted and you will be safe for the next round.
Good that i have a supportive and loving wife that allows me to do such with the promise that i will do the same as what she does.

[1715204202]

1715204202

[1715204202]

1715204202

[1715204202]

1715204202

[ethereumhunter]

~
Since most gamblers are addicted and they have no control over themselves so if such rules of limitations exists, this will force the gamblers not to play more than they can afford to lose. This will also impose restrictions on them and eventually many gamblers will be saved from losing a lot of money.

If most gamblers were addicted, gambling would be banned everywhere, and harsh punishments would be  imposed on those who disobey the ban. According to stats, around 25% of the world population gamble online, and around 50% gamble here and there from time to time. Think of it. If most of those people were addicted, it would lead to grave consequences for society.

Maybe what he means about most gamblers is people who know to gamble. But I think many gamblers are addicted, and they are spreads in many countries. I don't know how many percentages of the people who gamble online, but I think the number will be big since we don't know the real number. Most people don't mean people in all of the world, but people who play online gambling and offline gambling

[Ucy]

That is why I also consider external limiting feature to reduce our losses in gambling. Especially if we don't have someone to provide advice for us.

I learned self-control by having as much as many hobbies as my time permits me to do so and do an extreme time-management thing for myself. That, perhaps, is my limiting factor in gambling and it has been working pretty well I must say. I am living alone and I haven't been into a serious gambling spree thankfully and it seems that I wouldn't develop such an inclination towards an activity since I am always engaged in a lot of things.

Well I always lose $100 a month in dice. I am okay to forego the amount though if you think about it, that's $1200 in a year that could have been put into good use but whatever..

Im not really fan on totaling my loss in annual basis as long i havent able to spend such amount nor presume that it would really be a fixed amount because it would really be having some changes along the way.

It isnt really needed to have that external limiting feature because you can make yourself to be in controlled if you are really aware on what you are doing even if you do have lots of things to be done or not
as long you are aware that you are spending that much into things which arent really worth to spend on then thats the time you do make such immediate action.

If failed to do so then think back on whats the matter or mistake then try to realize and presume things on what would happen if you do let yourself do continue
to have this bad habit.

Such limiting features could be more suitable for frequent "big" bettors who aren't consistently profitable in their bets. It could also be used to prevent people from betting what they can't afford to lose aka gambling, or better still prevent people from taking too much betting risks

[CODE200]

Actually that would be a good idea to limit gamblers most specially now that most gamblers are at home playing at online casinos, limiting features if agreed could be a great help for those gamblers that are taking way too far on their limitations not knowing or not aware they are being struck into getting addicted. Though I doubt online casinos would do such for it is unfavorable for their part for they only concern obtaining money, having a limiting feature will be their great help for the sake and welfare of their players. Self-discipline if hard to be attained would be helped if ever a limiting feature would be set because he would have no choice but to stop for a while and try quite some other time to minimize game plays and to prevent getting addicted on playing gambling games.

[dunfida]

That is why I also consider external limiting feature to reduce our losses in gambling. Especially if we don't have someone to provide advice for us.

I learned self-control by having as much as many hobbies as my time permits me to do so and do an extreme time-management thing for myself. That, perhaps, is my limiting factor in gambling and it has been working pretty well I must say. I am living alone and I haven't been into a serious gambling spree thankfully and it seems that I wouldn't develop such an inclination towards an activity since I am always engaged in a lot of things.

Well I always lose $100 a month in dice. I am okay to forego the amount though if you think about it, that's $1200 in a year that could have been put into good use but whatever..

Im not really fan on totaling my loss in annual basis as long i havent able to spend such amount nor presume that it would really be a fixed amount because it would really be having some changes along the way.

It isnt really needed to have that external limiting feature because you can make yourself to be in controlled if you are really aware on what you are doing even if you do have lots of things to be done or not
as long you are aware that you are spending that much into things which arent really worth to spend on then thats the time you do make such immediate action.

If failed to do so then think back on whats the matter or mistake then try to realize and presume things on what would happen if you do let yourself do continue
to have this bad habit.

Such limiting features could be more suitable for frequent "big" bettors who aren't consistently profitable in their bets. It could also be used to prevent people from betting what they can't afford to lose aka gambling, or better still prevent people from taking too much betting risks

So they are just exclusively choosing those big bettors who do lost big time?I do rather believe on the other side of things if thinking off that they can make big bucks if those whale players would lose even more.How the hell they would care for such players specially on online casinos that they dont even know on whose playing in back of the monitor?
For physical casinos then there might be come consideration from the house owner that someone do really spend up that much but its hard to believe that they would completely
stop their profiting moment unless if they do really care for a person but its unlikely eh?

[Betwrong]

~
Since most gamblers are addicted and they have no control over themselves so if such rules of limitations exists, this will force the gamblers not to play more than they can afford to lose. This will also impose restrictions on them and eventually many gamblers will be saved from losing a lot of money.

If most gamblers were addicted, gambling would be banned everywhere, and harsh punishments would be  imposed on those who disobey the ban. According to stats, around 25% of the world population gamble online, and around 50% gamble here and there from time to time. Think of it. If most of those people were addicted, it would lead to grave consequences for society.

Maybe what he means about most gamblers is people who know to gamble. But I think many gamblers are addicted, and they are spreads in many countries. I don't know how many percentages of the people who gamble online, but I think the number will be big since we don't know the real number. Most people don't mean people in all of the world, but people who play online gambling and offline gambling

That's right, but the thing is that from all people in the world 26% gamble online and around 50% can be can be called gamblers, to some extent. You can check out the figures yourself by googling "how many people gamble". Here's just one example:

World gambling statistics show that around 26% of the population gamble. That means around 1.6 billion people worldwide gamble and 4.2 billion gamble at least once every year.

You see, those are big numbers. If most of those people were addicted, it would be a catastrophe.

[ethereumhunter]

Maybe what he means about most gamblers is people who know to gamble. But I think many gamblers are addicted, and they are spreads in many countries. I don't know how many percentages of the people who gamble online, but I think the number will be big since we don't know the real number. Most people don't mean people in all of the world, but people who play online gambling and offline gambling

That's right, but the thing is that from all people in the world 26% gamble online and around 50% can be can be called gamblers, to some extent. You can check out the figures yourself by googling "how many people gamble". Here's just one example:

World gambling statistics show that around 26% of the population gamble. That means around 1.6 billion people worldwide gamble and 4.2 billion gamble at least once every year.

You see, those are big numbers. If most of those people were addicted, it would be a catastrophe.

Yes, I got that. But still, that can not be used for the real data. Okay, maybe you are right, and the statistic is also correct. The things that matter here are how we can protect ourselves and prevent the addicting as you have the internet data. We can learn from the data, and we can also have a chance to select what we want to be if we wish to be part of that percentage or want to be a person who doesn't gamble or limit our time in gambling games.

[rodskee]

Actually that would be a good idea to limit gamblers most specially now that most gamblers are at home playing at online casinos, limiting features if agreed could be a great help for those gamblers that are taking way too far on their limitations not knowing or not aware they are being struck into getting addicted. Though I doubt online casinos would do such for it is unfavorable for their part for they only concern obtaining money, having a limiting feature will be their great help for the sake and welfare of their players. Self-discipline if hard to be attained would be helped if ever a limiting feature would be set because he would have no choice but to stop for a while and try quite some other time to minimize game plays and to prevent getting addicted on playing gambling games.

it is hard to deny the call of gambling specially when you are at home and doing nothing but under quarantine,So the chance of playing everytime we
have Money is there.

Those people that supposedly at work and busy doing something in their computer,now having nothing to enjoy so converting to
gambling is what they do..

So limiting them from playing is a best way to prevent them from losing more and from addiction also.

[Betwrong]

Maybe what he means about most gamblers is people who know to gamble. But I think many gamblers are addicted, and they are spreads in many countries. I don't know how many percentages of the people who gamble online, but I think the number will be big since we don't know the real number. Most people don't mean people in all of the world, but people who play online gambling and offline gambling

That's right, but the thing is that from all people in the world 26% gamble online and around 50% can be can be called gamblers, to some extent. You can check out the figures yourself by googling "how many people gamble". Here's just one example:

World gambling statistics show that around 26% of the population gamble. That means around 1.6 billion people worldwide gamble and 4.2 billion gamble at least once every year.

You see, those are big numbers. If most of those people were addicted, it would be a catastrophe.

Yes, I got that. But still, that can not be used for the real data. Okay, maybe you are right, and the statistic is also correct. The things that matter here are how we can protect ourselves and prevent the addicting as you have the internet data. We can learn from the data, and we can also have a chance to select what we want to be if we wish to be part of that percentage or want to be a person who doesn't gamble or limit our time in gambling games.

Yes, sure, all we need to have is a good self-control, and if we don't have it, gambling can be not our biggest problem. If we can't restrain ourselves when it's needed, we can encounter much bigger troubles than just losing money. That's why I'm against external limiting, as OP suggested. Gambling can teach us about self-policing, which can be useful in other fields of life too.

[South Park]

~
Since most gamblers are addicted and they have no control over themselves so if such rules of limitations exists, this will force the gamblers not to play more than they can afford to lose. This will also impose restrictions on them and eventually many gamblers will be saved from losing a lot of money.

If most gamblers were addicted, gambling would be banned everywhere, and harsh punishments would be  imposed on those who disobey the ban. According to stats, around 25% of the world population gamble online, and around 50% gamble here and there from time to time. Think of it. If most of those people were addicted, it would lead to grave consequences for society.

Agreed, obviously there are people that get addicted to gambling but the same can be said about video games, smart phones and many other activities and yet those activities are not forbidden or are look upon with suspicious eyes, most gamblers can control themselves and they know when to stop gambling and while maybe a few gamblers may lose control once in a while this is not enough to categorize them as being addicted, if anything if we are to be worried about a behaviour that is common place in this day and age I will put smart phone addiction at the top of that list.

[Wexnident]

~

Any, and by that I mean ANY type of addiction is always wrong. Too much of something is always detrimental to someone, whether it be physically or mentally or emotionally, and that's a fact imo. Addiction isn't too prevalent in casinos, yes, but casinos don't get banned mostly due to the amount of income they get, and the amount of help it does for the economy. Remember that most famous casinos have bigshots playing on them, playing amounts on tens of thousands, or maybe even hundreds of thousands per play.

Plus, imo, if the best for all were taken into account, they'd put more emphasis on preventing addiction instead of letting it happen even the minority. After all, it's always better to fix the negative than admire (or improve) the already positive factors.

[ethereumhunter]

Maybe what he means about most gamblers is people who know to gamble. But I think many gamblers are addicted, and they are spreads in many countries. I don't know how many percentages of the people who gamble online, but I think the number will be big since we don't know the real number. Most people don't mean people in all of the world, but people who play online gambling and offline gambling

That's right, but the thing is that from all people in the world 26% gamble online and around 50% can be can be called gamblers, to some extent. You can check out the figures yourself by googling "how many people gamble". Here's just one example:

World gambling statistics show that around 26% of the population gamble. That means around 1.6 billion people worldwide gamble and 4.2 billion gamble at least once every year.

You see, those are big numbers. If most of those people were addicted, it would be a catastrophe.

Yes, I got that. But still, that can not be used for the real data. Okay, maybe you are right, and the statistic is also correct. The things that matter here are how we can protect ourselves and prevent the addicting as you have the internet data. We can learn from the data, and we can also have a chance to select what we want to be if we wish to be part of that percentage or want to be a person who doesn't gamble or limit our time in gambling games.

Yes, sure, all we need to have is a good self-control, and if we don't have it, gambling can be not our biggest problem. If we can't restrain ourselves when it's needed, we can encounter much bigger troubles than just losing money. That's why I'm against external limiting, as OP suggested. Gambling can teach us about self-policing, which can be useful in other fields of life too.

From gambling, we can learn to control ourselves because controlling ourselves will be needed in gambling, but it is also required in many aspects. I agree that gambling can teach us about self-policing because that helps us survive in hard situations out of gambling. Gambling is just a place to learn many things that we don't get in real life. That if people can learn something from gambling. We need to think about the positive than to just think about the opposing side.

[stadus]

From gambling, we can learn to control ourselves because controlling ourselves will be needed in gambling,

We can learn means we make mistakes first? Control is a must, that's what you called being a discipline gambler, if possible we don't learn from our mistakes as sometimes that is too costly, believe me I've been there.

but it is also required in many aspects. I agree that gambling can teach us about self-policing because that helps us survive in hard situations out of gambling. Gambling is just a place to learn many things that we don't get in real life. That if people can learn something from gambling. We need to think about the positive than to just think about the opposing side.

Everything can be learn if we are willing to learn, it's just that there are people who doesn't want to learn, they make mistakes but still doing the same mistakes over and over again and that's the reason why they become addicted in gambling, and there's no entertainment anymore as anyone who are addicted in gambling, can't feel the entertainment anymore.

[Betwrong]

~
We can learn means we make mistakes first? Control is a must, that's what you called being a discipline gambler, if possible we don't learn from our mistakes as sometimes that is too costly, believe me I've been there.
~

Yes, but if your bets, combined during a certain period of time, are not higher that what you can afford to lose, then the price you pay for your learning is affordable, and you can save much more in the future thanks to your learning from gambling. So, it depends on your purpose: if it's winning a significant amount, then surely it can be too costly, but if it's learning how to restrain yourself from making high bets(which it should be), then it will not cost you much, compared to the value of the acquired knowledge.

[panganib999]

I guess that must be done. To have an external limiting feature so that we will be informed on when we should stop on anything we do most specially on playing gambling. But I think that must be done not at all sorts of entertainment things for we must be enjoying some times because we will feel annoyed and feel being controlled if all sort of entertainments will be inputted with an external limiting feature. Better we must be trustful with our own capacity as well to do make control of ourselves and not because something is limiting us to do so. Having an external limiting factor is fine as if it is really in need like for therapeutical procedures of addicted cases on playing gambling to let those individuals better know their limit not to exceed on the usual so they can be able to control themselves on playing too much.

[ethereumhunter]

From gambling, we can learn to control ourselves because controlling ourselves will be needed in gambling,

We can learn means we make mistakes first? Control is a must, that's what you called being a discipline gambler, if possible we don't learn from our mistakes as sometimes that is too costly, believe me I've been there.

We always make mistakes, but we never learn from those mistakes. Some people can learn from their mistakes because they want to fix that, and they hope that they don't make the same mistake in the future. I also have that experience, and even I almost lose much money if I don't stop. But I learned from that, so that makes me careful.

but it is also required in many aspects. I agree that gambling can teach us about self-policing because that helps us survive in hard situations out of gambling. Gambling is just a place to learn many things that we don't get in real life. That if people can learn something from gambling. We need to think about the positive than to just think about the opposing side.

Everything can be learn if we are willing to learn, it's just that there are people who doesn't want to learn, they make mistakes but still doing the same mistakes over and over again and that's the reason why they become addicted in gambling, and there's no entertainment anymore as anyone who are addicted in gambling, can't feel the entertainment anymore.

That is right. It is very difficult if we become addicted to gambling because we never see anything clear. We will see that playing gambling is only the passion that we must do every day. We don't care about the other, and if we win the money, we will stop and celebrate the money.

[bitcoinst]

Even if we all speak out, create a petition, I see no reason for casinos to listen to us. They make money, why should they think about the mental health of their clients? The worse it is, the more money the casino gets.
In addition, no one forces people to become addicted, we do it ourselves. Our health, including mental health, is our responsibility, there is no point in asking third parties to help us be healthy.
We either do what is necessary to be so or we do not.

[Lanatsa]

Even if we all speak out, create a petition, I see no reason for casinos to listen to us. They make money, why should they think about the mental health of their clients? The worse it is, the more money the casino gets.
In addition, no one forces people to become addicted, we do it ourselves. Our health, including mental health, is our responsibility, there is no point in asking third parties to help us be healthy.
We either do what is necessary to be so or we do not.

It all depends on us and its not their obligation to teach us on what are the things we gonna do yet they had just give out some entertainment and people would do the rest.

They wouldn't listen out no matter how we do make argumentations about that limiting feature which is totally dumb for a house to consider for it to be created.

We are all responsible for out money and they don't care on how we gonna spend it through those games.Its up to us people to took the blame not on the house itself.

[glowing10]

Even if we all speak out, create a petition, I see no reason for casinos to listen to us. They make money, why should they think about the mental health of their clients? The worse it is, the more money the casino gets.
In addition, no one forces people to become addicted, we do it ourselves. Our health, including mental health, is our responsibility, there is no point in asking third parties to help us be healthy.
We either do what is necessary to be so or we do not.

Casinos will have nothing to do in this because they run, they’re as a business and not as a medical help and if people who do not know or understand about it then nothing can be done about it. For young I can understand they are quite innocent and may not know the difference between right and wrong or its addiction. But what about adult who is very much matured but still can’t stay without gambling inspite of knowing every risk involved if do not remain in control and still we see people becoming addicted to it.

[Debonaire217]

Casinos will have nothing to do in this because they run, they’re as a business and not as a medical help and if people who do not know or understand about it then nothing can be done about it. For young I can understand they are quite innocent and may not know the difference between right and wrong or its addiction. But what about adult who is very much matured but still can’t stay without gambling inspite of knowing every risk involved if do not remain in control and still we see people becoming addicted to it.

That is why external limiting feature is needed. Even those matured people playing gambling could be addicted because of their wins and losses in gambling. Thus, they could spend more than their allotted funds for gambling, and might borrow funds from other people. Basically, these kind of addiction could destroy one's peoples live so Government is already taking action about it. Perhaps, implementing rules about limits in deposits and withdrawal would be the best way to help the gamblers. But one suggestion I can give is to base the limits depending on the wealth of a person.