What would be an ideal KYC solution?

[bittraffic]

I'm actually not sure how much is what they consider highroller where they mandate to submit KYC? $50K? 

From the research that I did most of them range between 1 BTC and 3 BTC, it depends on the casino. Some claim even 4, but those weren't licensed to begin with, so I have no clue.

3BTC is a bit small for suspecting money laundering but maybe if the value is sky-high it would be fair. Regulation is really here and we can't keep things unregulated since it's always the way before innovations are adopted for all.

My question is just that are we just too naive to think this regulation would be good for us and crypto and that giving up our privacy is worth it?

[Fortify]

Hey guys,

With all the KYC talk lately I wanted to open up a thread and ask about your opinion.

The side of the user:
- Prefers no KYC
- Prefers anon coins as a payment platform
- If a KYC is triggered, they want to trust the brand with their documents

The side of the casino:
- Regulators are asking them to do KYC, but they need to find a balance on when it's triggered. E.g. to keep a portion of the user happy, they can rise the trigger to a certain amount.
- They are tied to a payment provider, either because of the license or CMS, and can offer only a certain portion of cryptocurrency.
- Users are abusing them if there's absolutely no KYC matrix in the system.

What would, in your opinion, be the best balance here?

Efialtis from BTCGosu mentioned that some of the casino managers make exceptions, and I can imagine how that's possible, but I'm curious in what you would like to see there.

Regarding KYC: Their management confirmed with me personally that they would not enforce KYC. (Same old story, we could of course argue about that just like with any curacao licensed crypto casino) - the good news is when I have personal confirmation of such a statement, then I am putting a "No" and if they break their word at any point of time, I would take action. That is how I have always been handling this topic and how I will continue doing it.

Perhaps it would be good to have a single, super secure platform and potentially using some sort of Blockchain/nft solution to store documents - that could be used to validate whether someone has genuine documents. Maybe where different sources could give ratings, maybe whether certain ratings might hold extra weight (document was verified in-person). But to keep the anonymity side it would have to be somehow decentralised or in a jurisdiction that would not force documents to be disclosed.

[Shamm]

Before you choose KYC casino, you need to read the whole TOS first, you will find KYC mandatory rule and they can ask it in anytime. I think the reason why choose a KYC casino is you're already trust with that casino, I think when you already trust on that casino, you should trust anything that you submit to that casino too. This can be your username, password, email, IP address, Bitcoin address etc. Actually if you've link your Bitcoin address and IP address from your centralized exchange, the casino could know your identity if they ask the centralized exchange. You must have submitted your KYC to centralized exchange right?

This is reality mate if you will trust your casino then you should agree all the rules and regulations in that particular casino like KYC if they ask you a KYC then it's okay it because you trust your casino. But before you choose your casino make it sure that casino is reputable enough to be trusted. Because if you choose trusted casino you will be comfortable with enough to do anything and also you are comfortable enough to give your information.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

   - You know dude, first of all, we can't do anything if a casino has any rules, because we as gamblers have no other choice but to follow the rules they have if we want to continue gambling on their gambling platform, that's it and that's easy to understand.

Now, if other gamblers don't want KYC, it's still their choice whether they want to gamble there or not. All I know is that when a casino is in a regulated industry, it's normal for them to ask for KYC from their clients or users. And even though it is not regulated, the casino still has the right if they still want to ask for KYC.

[Cling18]

Each casino has to run their rules and the users have to deal with it. It's either they will take it or leave it. In some instances, players just complay with the KYC to continue playing on the site. As long as the site has a good reputation, I don't think KYC should be feared. I'm sure that they will never ruin their reputation by leaking their player's personal details. KYC is getting mandatory nowadays and we should just have to deal with it.

[livingfree]

There is no solution to it.

Just be aware of their rules before signing it and these days, most of them are likely to ask you kyc for whatever reasons they want to say. Accept the fact that the governments can no longer be cool by not having these casinos ask for kycs.

They've got their reasons, the casino has got reasons and we also got our reasons whether we will continue signing up and gambling with them or not.

[Genemind]

As a gambler, we all know that KYC is required by most gambling platforms and there's no way to avoid it. KYC is required for compliance, to avoid money laundering and any abuse. It's better to read their TOS regarding KYC as in some gambling platforms KYC isn't mandatory unless you hit a certain amount of deposit/withdrawal and if there's any suspicious activity while using their platform (cheating or abuse).

[panganib999]

Hey guys,

With all the KYC talk lately I wanted to open up a thread and ask about your opinion.

The side of the user:
- Prefers no KYC
- Prefers anon coins as a payment platform
- If a KYC is triggered, they want to trust the brand with their documents

The side of the casino:
- Regulators are asking them to do KYC, but they need to find a balance on when it's triggered. E.g. to keep a portion of the user happy, they can rise the trigger to a certain amount.
- They are tied to a payment provider, either because of the license or CMS, and can offer only a certain portion of cryptocurrency.
- Users are abusing them if there's absolutely no KYC matrix in the system.

What would, in your opinion, be the best balance here?

Efialtis from BTCGosu mentioned that some of the casino managers make exceptions, and I can imagine how that's possible, but I'm curious in what you would like to see there.

Regarding KYC: Their management confirmed with me personally that they would not enforce KYC. (Same old story, we could of course argue about that just like with any curacao licensed crypto casino) - the good news is when I have personal confirmation of such a statement, then I am putting a "No" and if they break their word at any point of time, I would take action. That is how I have always been handling this topic and how I will continue doing it.

Casino's rules are always the ones to be followed, never the players, if the player doesn't want to undergo KYC, they are always free to leave and find some other place that doesn't require them to do so. Honestly I am in support of it, the fact that it gives you some sense of safety because at the very least everyone who gambles in that site did the same thing as you and is subject to the extent of laws you are subjected to as well should one of them decide to mess with you or your account. I don't roll with no KYC because it's a bit iffy for me, sometimes even scary because if I could easily gamble and withdraw, this means that when I get hacked the hacker would have no trouble getting all my funds.

[FanEagle]

I have always said that the best way to go on with KYC is that you could ask for it if there is a problem. If there are no problems, and the money is low, and there is no big wins, the idea to ask for it makes no sense to me. Let's say I deposited 100 dollars somewhere, wagered around 2k dollars, and lost my 100 dollars and now I have nothing, why would the casino need my KYC for this?

There are some casinos that ask for it upfront, you don't know if I will even wager yet, just calm down. This is why ask for it if there is a need to ask, but if there are no needs and nothing is going on then there is also no reason to ask for it neither.

[madnessteat]

^

Generally I'm not a supporter of KYC/AML, but if to choose from gambling sites which require KYC immediately or which require it when they want, I would rather choose the first option, because after passing this procedure I would have more confidence that after making a deposit casino they will not have questions about who I am and where I got my money.

[MainIbem]

Naturally I m not against kyc and for me kyc is the best because to avoid thefts and money laundering. Besides as a gambler one thing you must do is to get your identity verification ready as those sites may request for kyc. Now why are you afraid, did you stole any funds or do some Billion dollars and why should kyc be a thing of talk or though time.

[Fatunad]

There is no solution to it.

Just be aware of their rules before signing it and these days, most of them are likely to ask you kyc for whatever reasons they want to say. Accept the fact that the governments can no longer be cool by not having these casinos ask for kycs.

They've got their reasons, the casino has got reasons and we also got our reasons whether we will continue signing up and gambling with them or not.

For now, lets just cherish up those casinos which does still not ask out for some KYC on the time that we do make out some registration, but you should not really remove into your mind that
they could really be able to ask out anytime according into their likings and this is always been the case which they could really make out some alibis that you had violated the terms and conditions
or they had noticed something shady in regarding with your betting behavior.Its really that something we gamblers cant really be able to resist nor avoid on what government is trying
to monitor out and these business are to follow because if they dont then we know on what would gonna happen.There's indeed no solution into this but rather
better make yourself able to get deal with this.

[Jemzx00]

^

Generally I'm not a supporter of KYC/AML, but if to choose from gambling sites which require KYC immediately or which require it when they want, I would rather choose the first option, because after passing this procedure I would have more confidence that after making a deposit casino they will not have questions about who I am and where I got my money.

I also don't support KYC as I worry about my personal data however if I'll be given a choice to choose between gambling platforms that require KYC upon registration or only require it once needed, then I would rather choose the latter part instead. With all the number of gambling platforms rising right now, I want to experience most of them and try it out for myself, but I don't think providing my data to all these platforms are necessary just to test it.

For me, it is much better to be asked for a KYC once needed to and not while signing up.

[iv4n]

Naturally I m not against kyc and for me kyc is the best because to avoid thefts and money laundering. Besides as a gambler one thing you must do is to get your identity verification ready as those sites may request for kyc. Now why are you afraid, did you stole any funds or do some Billion dollars and why should kyc be a thing of talk or though time.

In 2010, Wachovia Bank, now part of Wells Fargo, was one of the biggest banks in the US when authorities discovered it had enabled Mexican cartels to launder an estimated $390 billion between 2004-2007

We, fair players, are at risk if we have to go through the KYC procedure in each casino and leave our personal and sensitive info on each of those sites.
KYC is full of flaws, it didn't prevent money laundering and theft before, and it won't work now in the crypto. So I don't feel that I'm "more" protected if a site has mandatory KYC, and I don't think it's in the spirit of crypto.

The ideal KYC solution is what we have now, we can play without KYC in many casinos, and as long as we are playing fair nobody will ask anything. But suspicious activities should trigger KYC. Definitely, it should be clear what is "suspicious activity" is, we all know that some sites dispute big winnings that way and don't pay them out. Just saying that someone is suspicious shouldn't be enough, but even that is a tricky part because of confidentiality they can't share sensitive info. So whom to trust in the end if we don't know everything we need to know?

[michellee]

Naturally I m not against kyc and for me kyc is the best because to avoid thefts and money laundering. Besides as a gambler one thing you must do is to get your identity verification ready as those sites may request for kyc. Now why are you afraid, did you stole any funds or do some Billion dollars and why should kyc be a thing of talk or though time.

I think it's because we play gambling using crypto, where crypto is about the anonymity of each user. So those who gamble using crypto expect casinos not to implement KYC on their premises. But it seems that it is difficult at the moment because the government wants to participate in monitoring and wants to know who is gambling using crypto. But we have to be prepared if the casinos ask us to do KYC one day and if we don't want to, we can only look for other casino sites.

[SirJohnVonSlotty]

Perhaps it would be good to have a single, super secure platform and potentially using some sort of Blockchain/nft solution to store documents - that could be used to validate whether someone has genuine documents. Maybe where different sources could give ratings, maybe whether certain ratings might hold extra weight (document was verified in-person). But to keep the anonymity side it would have to be somehow decentralised or in a jurisdiction that would not force documents to be disclosed.

So, same like there are payment providers like CoinsPaid, that generate the address and sort out the payments between the casino and the user, you think that it would be smart to have a "KYC provider" that would be a third-party body that would KYC everyone, and then regardless of the casino you're playing, it would state that you're KYC-ed?

It sounds interesting, but then we would again end up with the same question "when to KYC", just on the KYC providers side.

[Wind_FURY]

I don't think that there's a solution for that. Casinos that ask KYC will always stop gamblers to withdraw their balance until they passed the KYC which it's purpose is entirely about AML. The problem with that is even though a gambler won huge amount and wanted to withdraw and yet they still ask KYC when you can check the gambler's record when that person won in that bet. As far as I noticed, those who open an accusation thread is that the person who won provided an information about the winning bet and yet the casino ask for KYC to withdraw (some cases not get paid until they open a scam accusation).

But THERE IS a solution, just like Bitcoin was designed to give the user the capability to go around regulations, building a casino to process its transactions directly onchain can also give the casinos the same regulation-avoiding capabilities.

DirectBet was a true onchain Bitcoin casino. The was user never requires to make an account, or required to make a deposit. Everything was done onchain. Although, it was slow and inefficient during high network congestion. I would like to see it built on "faster" blockchains, like Litecoin/Dogecoin.

[coin-investor]

What would, in your opinion, be the best balance here?

Casino hands are tied up because of the regulation even if they want to give what the community wants, they cannot do it, because their license issuer will not let them, and they have to comply with what their license issuer asks them to do with their players, the best options or bargain for users is to play on casino with a good reputation, a casino where your sensitive information is safe and they are compliant to the authority when it comes to asking KYC FOR their users, casinos are centralized and regulated they function that way to protect their casino and their users.

[ethereumhunter]

Perhaps it would be good to have a single, super secure platform and potentially using some sort of Blockchain/nft solution to store documents - that could be used to validate whether someone has genuine documents. Maybe where different sources could give ratings, maybe whether certain ratings might hold extra weight (document was verified in-person). But to keep the anonymity side it would have to be somehow decentralised or in a jurisdiction that would not force documents to be disclosed.

So, same like there are payment providers like CoinsPaid, that generate the address and sort out the payments between the casino and the user, you think that it would be smart to have a "KYC provider" that would be a third-party body that would KYC everyone, and then regardless of the casino you're playing, it would state that you're KYC-ed?

It sounds interesting, but then we would again end up with the same question "when to KYC", just on the KYC providers side.

Doing KYC will depend on the limits set by the casino. Maybe the casino has set an amount for each member and if they cross that limit, the casino will ask them to do KYC. It could be possible that we will have a third party that will handle KYC issues and it's not done by casinos anymore but the problem is it's not easy to set up everything. Moreover, there will be a significant cost factor to set up and people who work as third parties must really work hard to ensure all user data will be safe from things they don't want.

[Silberman]

What would, in your opinion, be the best balance here?

Casino hands are tied up because of the regulation even if they want to give what the community wants, they cannot do it, because their license issuer will not let them, and they have to comply with what their license issuer asks them to do with their players, the best options or bargain for users is to play on casino with a good reputation, a casino where your sensitive information is safe and they are compliant to the authority when it comes to asking KYC FOR their users, casinos are centralized and regulated they function that way to protect their casino and their users.

Unfortunately there is no other option that makes any sense for the gamblers, as much as we would like for this to not be the case it is not possible anymore, the gambling industry is huge and the governments cannot afford to ignore it anymore, especially now that they need all the money they can get due to the difficult economic circumstances they are facing, now some gamblers may try their luck with unlicensed casinos but that decision has its own fair share of problems.