Poker casino but need KYC, is this really necessary?

[hahay]

Really necessary? They would really be asking it out and if you don't like then simply skip and find another place.

That was the basic response if you are new to the site.

But what if your favorite site implements that? Can you still apply that find another place argument? It's not easy to just try a non-reputable site just to avoid KYC that's why at least these reputable sites will not implement KYC.

I don't see any sense of underdoing a KYC where you are only a casual gambler. No way I will submit my personal ID and documents for a $100-$200 budget activity for gambling every 2 weeks or a month.

For me, KYC in gambling is something that makes me very uncomfortable. Therefore, when my favorite gambling site implements KYC, I personally will give it up and look for other sites that still have a reputation but don't need KYC. There are still many famous gambling sites available out there that do not implement this, so for now there are still many alternatives for me personally to change sites and that might be the best way for me at this time.

[1715096558]

1715096558

[Maslate]

Really necessary? They would really be asking it out and if you don't like then simply skip and find another place.

That was the basic response if you are new to the site.

But what if your favorite site implements that? Can you still apply that find another place argument? It's not easy to just try a non-reputable site just to avoid KYC that's why at least these reputable sites will not implement KYC.

I don't see any sense of underdoing a KYC where you are only a casual gambler. No way I will submit my personal ID and documents for a $100-$200 budget activity for gambling every 2 weeks or a month.

For me, KYC in gambling is something that makes me very uncomfortable. Therefore, when my favorite gambling site implements KYC, I personally will give it up and look for other sites that still have a reputation but don't need KYC. There are still many famous gambling sites available out there that do not implement this, so for now there are still many alternatives for me personally to change sites and that might be the best way for me at this time.

That's what I thought to see gamblers will find other sites that don't mind asking about KYC on their players. As for me, KYC doesn't necessary and our privacy is much necessary than this. I don't think how this becomes an urge from them.

I know that some people are using gambling sites to protect their illegal activities become noticeable by others as they certainly found anonymous but this couldn't help to stop this. As for the countless numbers of gambling sites that existed today (known/not known) they can still make it. 

[sujonali1819]

To be honest as I know when you get a licences from a Licence provider they have individual rules to make the Business legal. I think KYC comes from there. And Gambling platform is forced to ask pass KYC the players. This is actually a rules from the Licence provider imo. But it keeps clam the players till it done for only FIAT depositor. And id For crypto any platform ask KYC I don't suggest to play there.

[poldanmig]

Really necessary? They would really be asking it out and if you don't like then simply skip and find another place.

That was the basic response if you are new to the site.

But what if your favorite site implements that? Can you still apply that find another place argument? It's not easy to just try a non-reputable site just to avoid KYC that's why at least these reputable sites will not implement KYC.

I don't see any sense of underdoing a KYC where you are only a casual gambler. No way I will submit my personal ID and documents for a $100-$200 budget activity for gambling every 2 weeks or a month.

actually the implementation of kyc carried out by casinos is not a bad thing if indeed the casino is a trusted casino and gets an official license from the government, I think the kyc rule is a decision from the authority of a country to prevent money laundering from players on the site, all sites those who have gambling licenses from reputable organizations must follow the rules for verifying player accounts, so that the government can properly supervise the site and the players.

[AakZaki]

That's one case of why I think at the least the most basic of a KYC should be implemented. I meam you're right it's a choice but I think everyone should implement this because people knows how to abuse the system and the system shouldn't give them any chance on abusing it.

Maybe a lot of people will shy away from KYC. But I don't think that will be possible. There may be some casino packages without KYC but of course it has simpler features because of course the official casino knows the risks. I think it's only natural that casinos have a legal obligation to provide a KYC for verification. This means that the Casino requires doing KYC to save what they have, they don't want to get in trouble for breaking the rules. For us, we may feel a little doubtful, but that is the risk of what we want to play at the casino. So as long as the Casino is responsible I don't think we need to worry.

[harizen]

actually the implementation of kyc carried out by casinos is not a bad thing if indeed the casino is a trusted casino and gets an official license from the government, I think the kyc rule is a decision from the authority of a country to prevent money laundering from players on the site, all sites those who have gambling licenses from reputable organizations must follow the rules for verifying player accounts, so that the government can properly supervise the site and the players.

It's not convenient as new users will also have to comply with that. If let's say all reputable gambling sites that are mostly used today will implement KYC, you have to deal with KYC at each and that's not good for a regular gambler who plays at different sites.

It will also affect the promotion of the site as no one will test a site if there's a KYC before you can play there. Like a player that will test a small $ to play on the site but can't do it because it needs KYC. Offering fun money won't work there too because the excitement will only be felt by real money gambling. 

KYC should only be on fiat gambling because most fiat casinos accounts are linked with bank accounts that are more prone to money laundering.

[24Kt]

actually the implementation of kyc carried out by casinos is not a bad thing if indeed the casino is a trusted casino and gets an official license from the government, I think the kyc rule is a decision from the authority of a country to prevent money laundering from players on the site, all sites those who have gambling licenses from reputable organizations must follow the rules for verifying player accounts, so that the government can properly supervise the site and the players.

It's not convenient as new users will also have to comply with that. If let's say all reputable gambling sites that are mostly used today will implement KYC, you have to deal with KYC at each and that's not good for a regular gambler who plays at different sites.

It will also affect the promotion of the site as no one will test a site if there's a KYC before you can play there. Like a player that will test a small $ to play on the site but can't do it because it needs KYC. Offering fun money won't work there too because the excitement will only be felt by real money gambling. 

KYC should only be on fiat gambling because most fiat casinos accounts are linked with bank accounts that are more prone to money laundering.

But with changing government regulations and with the requirements from their gambling license, some crypto casinos are forced to require their players to comply with KYC. And I think, they can't do much about it but follow the laws, or else, they will lose their license. So for now, just look for casinos without KYC and they are still a lot of them anyway.

[Cling18]

Really necessary? They would really be asking it out and if you don't like then simply skip and find another place.

That was the basic response if you are new to the site.

But what if your favorite site implements that? Can you still apply that find another place argument? It's not easy to just try a non-reputable site just to avoid KYC that's why at least these reputable sites will not implement KYC.

I don't see any sense of underdoing a KYC where you are only a casual gambler. No way I will submit my personal ID and documents for a $100-$200 budget activity for gambling every 2 weeks or a month.

If they're reputable and trusted, then I would entrust them my personal detail as long as I would have an assurance that they would be secured and protected. Yes, it's hard to submit KYC on different sites so I will only pick the best and most reputable one. KYC has an important function too and it's also for our own good.

[traderethereum]

actually the implementation of kyc carried out by casinos is not a bad thing if indeed the casino is a trusted casino and gets an official license from the government, I think the kyc rule is a decision from the authority of a country to prevent money laundering from players on the site, all sites those who have gambling licenses from reputable organizations must follow the rules for verifying player accounts, so that the government can properly supervise the site and the players.

It's not convenient as new users will also have to comply with that. If let's say all reputable gambling sites that are mostly used today will implement KYC, you have to deal with KYC at each and that's not good for a regular gambler who plays at different sites.

It will also affect the promotion of the site as no one will test a site if there's a KYC before you can play there. Like a player that will test a small $ to play on the site but can't do it because it needs KYC. Offering fun money won't work there too because the excitement will only be felt by real money gambling. 

KYC should only be on fiat gambling because most fiat casinos accounts are linked with bank accounts that are more prone to money laundering.

But with changing government regulations and with the requirements from their gambling license, some crypto casinos are forced to require their players to comply with KYC. And I think, they can't do much about it but follow the laws, or else, they will lose their license. So for now, just look for casinos without KYC and they are still a lot of them anyway.

Indeed. But the player will have their own choice to play gambling on the site that they think will not request doing KYC.
Even if many gambling sites need to comply with KYC, I am sure some other gambling sites will not asking about KYC to their members and the government can not force them.
KYC or not, for crypto gamblers, they better use the gambling site free from KYC because they do not want to get a problem by submitting their private document.
The government itself should realize that and will not try to search for how they can get the KYC from the online casino that is not in their jurisdiction.

[Poker Player]

I don't see mentioned that in poker, unlike other casino games, there is another reason to implement kyc, apart from the typical anti money laundering reason: to avoid collusion. If you don't identify individual players with a different identity each, you can have two or three players at a table who are playing together from the same place ( knowing what cards each one of them has.

[Luzin]

The government itself should realize that and will not try to search for how they can get the KYC from the online casino that is not in their jurisdiction.

Maybe this is what makes us doubt. Choice of providing data for kyc or not playing casino. Indeed, there are concerns because our data can be misused. But I think the casino that does KYC is a good casino, he seems to stick to the rules and doesn't want to have a problem with the rules. Regarding this law, such as the issue of Binance which was sued by several countries, they decided on the IP. Because they are not licensed in some of those countries.

I think in the end it's just a matter of money, they ask for income tax for countries that have a lot of users. Casino also looks like he should have the force of law. Because if the casino is online then the reach is world. The casino can be sued by any of the countries around the world. Sorry if I am wrong.

[Wexnident]

Maybe this is what makes us doubt. Choice of providing data for kyc or not playing casino. Indeed, there are concerns because our data can be misused. But I think the casino that does KYC is a good casino, he seems to stick to the rules and doesn't want to have a problem with the rules. Regarding this law, such as the issue of Binance which was sued by several countries, they decided on the IP. Because they are not licensed in some of those countries.

Whether a casino is "good" or "bad" is a separate matter really, the issue here is that your details are directly linked into an online database of the casino. Once that certain casino causes a leak or is hacked, no matter how "good" the casino is, your personal details would still be leaked nonetheless. It's a small possibility yes, but a possibility nonetheless. That's only a small part though, since there are still casinos that could leak said data.

Indeed. But the player will have their own choice to play gambling on the site that they think will not request doing KYC.
Even if many gambling sites need to comply with KYC, I am sure some other gambling sites will not asking about KYC to their members and the government can not force them.

They can though. Preventing players from gambling is pretty much the direct option for when players don't want to present their KYC.

[traderethereum]

The government itself should realize that and will not try to search for how they can get the KYC from the online casino that is not in their jurisdiction.

Maybe this is what makes us doubt. Choice of providing data for kyc or not playing casino. Indeed, there are concerns because our data can be misused. But I think the casino that does KYC is a good casino, he seems to stick to the rules and doesn't want to have a problem with the rules. Regarding this law, such as the issue of Binance which was sued by several countries, they decided on the IP. Because they are not licensed in some of those countries.

I think in the end it's just a matter of money, they ask for income tax for countries that have a lot of users. Casino also looks like he should have the force of law. Because if the casino is online then the reach is world. The casino can be sued by any of the countries around the world. Sorry if I am wrong.

I am concerned about the customer's data misuse because we do not know what they will do with our personal data.
But somehow, I still do not prefer to use casinos that require KYC as playing gambling for some people is just for fun and not trying to make money.
Maybe in this pandemic, the government sees that online gambling grows faster than a few years ago so they think that will be a good income for the country if they can force the casino to follow their new rules.
Yes, it is about money because the government wants to get more income tax from many businesses, especially in this pandemic, their income drop drastically.
The government sees this as an opportunity to gain benefits from online gambling.

[7788bitcoin]

~
But what if your favorite site implements that? Can you still apply that find another place argument? It's not easy to just try a non-reputable site just to avoid KYC that's why at least these reputable sites will not implement KYC.

The reputation you are talking about is the number of years they are in the market right. If you are registered legally then you will be forced to comply with KYC because it is a global norm and if you are playing in sites that does not enforce them you need to understand that they are still in the grey side of things but their reputation in the market will give them the necessary trust.

I don't see any sense of underdoing a KYC where you are only a casual gambler. No way I will submit my personal ID and documents for a $100-$200 budget activity for gambling every 2 weeks or a month.

They are implementing these, either they are registered according to the government rules and regulation and not in off shores free markets and once that are registered in free markets would enable KYC if they are giving away promotions and there will be users trying to take advantage of them and for them to avoid abuse they will enforce KYC or provide incentives to verify everything.

[molsewid]

I am concerned about the customer's data misuse because we do not know what they will do with our personal data.
But somehow, I still do not prefer to use casinos that require KYC as playing gambling for some people is just for fun and not trying to make money.
Maybe in this pandemic, the government sees that online gambling grows faster than a few years ago so they think that will be a good income for the country if they can force the casino to follow their new rules.
Yes, it is about money because the government wants to get more income tax from many businesses, especially in this pandemic, their income drop drastically.
The government sees this as an opportunity to gain benefits from online gambling.

I think every gambler will be concerned too about giving their personal details in a poker casino because some or many of the gamblers didn't want to disclosed their personal details and the fear that it may be misused is highly prioritize. Some of the gamblers too didn't come to casino or online casino to earn money but some are just here for fun. Somehow, I would agree with you mate that this kind of regulation was required by the government to impose a tax to a gamblers which of course one of the way of a government to earn money.

[Betwrong]

^

I don't see the point in guessing how protected your personal data is. I perfectly understand people who don't pass the KYC because as I told many times before there is a big enough number of sites that offer users the game of poker without the need to provide their personal data which allows to completely eliminate the risk of leakage of personal data to the black market.

Here is an example of one of such sites - https://t.me/pokerton_chat_en (not advertising) 

To me, we are talking more about the future here. I think KYC will be required everywhere in the nearest future.  Maybe some shady sites will not require it, but most gamblers will be avoiding those sites for obvious reasons.

I don't see mentioned that in poker, unlike other casino games, there is another reason to implement kyc, apart from the typical anti money laundering reason: to avoid collusion. If you don't identify individual players with a different identity each, you can have two or three players at a table who are playing together from the same place ( knowing what cards each one of them has.

Can't they be different persons in different parts of the world and still be doing this? When I play I always allow that possibility, and that's why I prefer tournaments with several tables at least to minimize the chance of  such cheaters sitting with me at the same table. In short, in the current world KYC is hardly an effective way of avoiding collusion.

[pauloaragaomelo]

$200 is a big amount for people like me who are living in a third world country if I can withdraw it without depositing a big amount of money and do not have to play but it's not possible of course they want you to lose that bonus and the money that you deposited and at the same time do KYC, so I don't think I will take a bite on this kind of offer. 

Almost the average person will refuse to provide an identity for whatever the offer is for fear of having their identity card misused, you have to verify the platform and make sure it doesn't specify the KYC obligation rules then it will be better before you deposit funds to the poker platform.

[goinmerry]

Almost the average person will refuse to provide an identity for whatever the offer is for fear of having their identity card misused, you have to verify the platform and make sure it doesn't specify the KYC obligation rules then it will be better before you deposit funds to the poker platform.

Actually, almost all of the average people you are talking about don't have a problem with complying with KYC.

The only problem is, it should not be applicable to a crypto-gambling site where operations and services are different compare to crypto exchanges.

If there's a time that my preferred gambling site will ask for KYC, I'm sorry but I need to find another one. I don't really feel comfortable being a public person on my gambling activity. It's a personal thing.

[qwertyup23]

What do you think about this issue? Do you want to do KYC just for gambling on any platform?
Also added that they are giving new users registered through their referral link some money, and they also require KYC to receive it. I heard that this amount is up to 200$, if you are, would you like to sell your identity to get this money?

The purpose of KYC is to protect the gambling establishment of fraud and other scams. While it may add an extra layer of security on the gambling website, it also provides a huge risk for gamblers in terms of their safety and identity as it is been exposed to the gambling website. That is why, I highly suggest that people should submit KYC documents to familiar gambling websites to also add a layer of security on their end.

Personally, I would avoid gambling websites that mandates KYC documents as a pre-requisite in withdrawing your funds. It is just too risky to expose your identity in an online set-up where anyone can have access on it.

[Sanugarid]

~

since you can never tell which poker games will be high stakes or not and for that matter it's better to offer the same type of security for all games within your site by adding KYC upon signup. That way everyone is secured and no one gets left out.

You can actually tell if thr sites wants to label the site that they want to be high stakes, I mean they can easily declare that to enter a room, there's a minimum amount that will indicate that it's a high stakes game.