Doxxed team can help a new gambling platform?

[BenCodie]

It would require a large set of cahoona's and a hell of a lot of confidence to open publicly deem yourself as a founder of a casino or gambling platform. Especially with the known fact that there are angry losers out there. 

[1715594598]

1715594598

[1715594598]

1715594598

[1715594598]

1715594598

[Fivestar4everMVP]

It would require a large set of cahoona's and a hell of a lot of confidence to open publicly deem yourself as a founder of a casino or gambling platform. Especially with the known fact that there are angry losers out there. 

It is not even necessary if you ask me, a founder of a casino doxxing himself or better put, announcing himself as a founder/owner of a casino would be him taking too much risk, normally, this act will probably make gamblers to trust his casino more and having a huge user based even without much marketing won't be too much of a problem, but then, on the other hand, like you rightly said, there are alot of angry losers out there who would go to any extent and length to either get their money back or revenge their loss on the founder of the casino, I believe this one of the major reasons why casinos owners remain anonymous, which is very understandable if I'm asked.

[Newlifebtc]

Hi friends, I am still on the matter of helping a friend who wants to build his own gambling project, the question of the day is about KYC verification, why are popular crypto gambling platforms are not KYC verified themselves? I mean the team behind the online casino why are they not KYC verified and they ask for KYC instead?

Wouldn't it be more fair if they want to stay behind the veil and not as users KYC verification? If they are scared of the law/regulations it makes sense the are verified too, doxxed or something .

Anyway fast forward to my second question, will a gambling platform be more attractive for users if the team are 100% doxxed?

Most of the crypto casinos that we have are always hiding the face of the owner to prevent easy sanctions from either the government or there own customers that may not find there business operation genuine enough. If the team are asking for verification like KYC from customers then that do not mean that there shouldn't be some level of verifications from players so that to limit the level of robing the casino.

Most of the casinos does not have kyc because they are hidden and any casino platform that I have kyc verification the one that is well-known so when you check across and we have 400 casino platform out of the hundred percent of casino it is only 50 or 45% that have kyc verification and that is being supported by government and always have a licence to operate through the government so that is why many of them are hidden so that they will not be known and the many of them are scum platform of casino also

[Yogee]

It will probably help since this sounds more like a marketing stunt to me. You have to ask if it is worth risking the security of the owners in revealing their identity over the "fairness on KYC". I'm thinking of a $5 wrench attack if a gambler is near the area of the owner.

$5 wrench attack on the casino owner? For what? It's not like they're walking around with the casino's entire bankroll in their pocket. And let's be real, all physical business owners handling large sums of cash are in the same boat.

You never know what people desperate for money thinks. Have you not heard or read anything about those people attacked because they own some crypo? They are not even rich or own a significant amount. It may not be a $5 wrench attack against these casino owners but the danger remains when their personal info is known.

[serveria.com]

I can speak for myself, I'm not sure if my pov is common or not. I feel more safe when a gambling website is registered with a gambling authority (no matter where in the world). Just gives me that extra feeling of security. I'm not really interested who runs/maintains the casino and their identity. But that's just me of course.

[lienfaye]

I can speak for myself, I'm not sure if my pov is common or not. I feel more safe when a gambling website is registered with a gambling authority (no matter where in the world). Just gives me that extra feeling of security. I'm not really interested who runs/maintains the casino and their identity. But that's just me of course.

Same here. I'm not interested to the people behind the casino as long as they're operating with license. Of course it's not a guarantee that the casino is not scam but as a gambler we're not trusting easily right? Hence, it takes time for us to trust if they already establish their reputation just like the old casinos did.

Anyway, transparency of operators might help their platform but I don't think they will expose their identity for their sake of their business because of the risk. That's why they have their own rules and conditions for their customers. So if you don't like how they run their platform then you're free to leave.

[Hispo]

I would personally feel okey enough if the casino is properly registered and manages to build a good reputation from the ground up. Perhaps, if the person behind the casino was a public figure like Vitalik Buterin, for example, it would make sense to make it known, since the reputation of that person may attract gamblers.
Isn't that kind of thing of doxxed teams more common in altcoins projects rather than serious casinos?

I remember it used to be a thing to invest in a coin whose team identity was of public knowledge.

[traderethereum]

The team behind the online casino did not need to show the public that they did KYC.
And I'm not really interested in knowing who's behind the casino, either.
The most important thing for me is that the casino has a good reputation, is trusted, can serve all its members well, and always provides attractive bonuses.
Gamblers will also think like that because they are only interested in everything I mentioned earlier so they won't think much about who the team is behind the casino.

[coin-investor]

It would require a large set of cahoona's and a hell of a lot of confidence to open publicly deem yourself as a founder of a casino or gambling platform. Especially with the known fact that there are angry losers out there. 

Even if we like owners to doxxed themselves for the sake of reputation, that will put the casino at risk because gamblers even if they lose fairly will still complaints, we have reports of gamblers losing fairly but still filing a scam accusations and posting hate remarks it will not only harm the owners but their family and their associate as well.
Casinos with doxxed owners will eventually close the casino if they attack their families and those close to them, casinos are one of the platforms where the owners need not be doxxed to gain a reputation, its enough that they do their best to maintain their reputation by treating their players fairly.

[davis196]

Hi friends, I am still on the matter of helping a friend who wants to build his own gambling project, the question of the day is about KYC verification, why are popular crypto gambling platforms are not KYC verified themselves? I mean the team behind the online casino why are they not KYC verified and they ask for KYC instead?

Wouldn't it be more fair if they want to stay behind the veil and not as users KYC verification? If they are scared of the law/regulations it makes sense the are verified too, doxxed or something .

Anyway fast forward to my second question, will a gambling platform be more attractive for users if the team are 100% doxxed?

That's an interesting question.
Imagine if all crypto casino owners and dev teams were required to identify themselves publicly. I'm sure that 99% of them would leave the gambling business or try to bypass the ID verification by submitting false IDs.
Will a crypto casino look more trusted if the dev team/owner are doxxed? Maybe yes, but that won't stop them from finding legal ways to scam the users and to not pay their profits. There are multiple excuses for refusing withdrawals "because of suspicious activity" or "breaking the Terms of Service" and all that stuff. In summary, I don't think that doxxing the casino dev teams/owners would solve all problems inside the crypto gambling industry.

[arwin100]

It would require a large set of cahoona's and a hell of a lot of confidence to open publicly deem yourself as a founder of a casino or gambling platform. Especially with the known fact that there are angry losers out there. 

Even if we like owners to doxxed themselves for the sake of reputation, that will put the casino at risk because gamblers even if they lose fairly will still complaints, we have reports of gamblers losing fairly but still filing a scam accusations and posting hate remarks it will not only harm the owners but their family and their associate as well.
Casinos with doxxed owners will eventually close the casino if they attack their families and those close to them, casinos are one of the platforms where the owners need not be doxxed to gain a reputation, its enough that they do their best to maintain their reputation by treating their players fairly.

Maybe that will be the outcome but most of the businessman running a business online know the risk so mostly they only set a social media account which is visible to all for their selves with no link with their relatives. So even if they provide their KYC still everything will be fine on their end so business as usual for them what's for us now is we should also ignore about this since scammer will always do scam even if they expose theirselves or not. What's more important is casino reputation and this will always tell all what we need.

[maydna]

Hi friends, I am still on the matter of helping a friend who wants to build his own gambling project, the question of the day is about KYC verification, why are popular crypto gambling platforms are not KYC verified themselves? I mean the team behind the online casino why are they not KYC verified and they ask for KYC instead?

Wouldn't it be more fair if they want to stay behind the veil and not as users KYC verification? If they are scared of the law/regulations it makes sense the are verified too, doxxed or something .

Anyway fast forward to my second question, will a gambling platform be more attractive for users if the team are 100% doxxed?

That's an interesting question.
Imagine if all crypto casino owners and dev teams were required to identify themselves publicly. I'm sure that 99% of them would leave the gambling business or try to bypass the ID verification by submitting false IDs.
Will a crypto casino look more trusted if the dev team/owner are doxxed? Maybe yes, but that won't stop them from finding legal ways to scam the users and to not pay their profits. There are multiple excuses for refusing withdrawals "because of suspicious activity" or "breaking the Terms of Service" and all that stuff. In summary, I don't think that doxxing the casino dev teams/owners would solve all problems inside the crypto gambling industry.

No crypto casino owners want to show their identity in public because it will be a matter of security for them when they are in public. It's not easy for them when they walk in public spaces, and many people will recognize them as crypto casino owners. Maybe they should hire a lot of bodyguards to protect them.

But suppose they want to establish a legal business related to gambling. In that case, they will be asked to do KYC so that the government can know that the business will not carry out illegal activities. Maybe the identity of a casino owner can give confidence to the public, especially gamblers, but it seems gamblers don't pay too much attention to this problem. They just play gambling in the casino without wanting to know who owns the casino, and as long as they can enjoy the casino, they will continue to play.

[len01]

I can speak for myself, I'm not sure if my pov is common or not. I feel more safe when a gambling website is registered with a gambling authority (no matter where in the world). Just gives me that extra feeling of security. I'm not really interested who runs/maintains the casino and their identity. But that's just me of course.

I agree with your statement.
as a gambler actually only needs the trust built by the casino. gamblers will never care who is behind the casinos and what they look like. but gamblers only need great trust that all gamblers can hold and make them comfortable when betting at the casino.
it is also not important to me to know who owns the casino because all that matters is the reputation of trust that can be held.

[pixie85]

All owners and partners do KYC, just not to you or any of their clients. They do it to the government agencies that register the business and give it a license to operate.

As far as I know you need to do KYC when you need the license for the casino. So with the licensed casino at least you know that you can file a complain against them to the license provider. It's up to the license provider how they judge the merit of the competence. Most of the time they don't care about hearing clients because the casino is important for them not the clients. After all the the casino is giving them the money they need.

They also need to register with their full name and address for tax purposes, even if they avoid the license. Some people run a gambling operation without a license, posing as something else, like a raffle company that doesn't need a license, or a software company. Alameda was a trading company registered as a blockchain research company.

Anyway, even without a license you have to be registered for tax compliance. You can avoid government agencies like the ones that oversee gambling or trading but you can't avoid the tax man. Once you have income they will require you to give some information about the business you're running.

The way fraudulent operators avoid it is by using homeless people to register the business. These people have nothing so they have nothing to lose.

[decodx]

It will probably help since this sounds more like a marketing stunt to me. You have to ask if it is worth risking the security of the owners in revealing their identity over the "fairness on KYC". I'm thinking of a $5 wrench attack if a gambler is near the area of the owner.

$5 wrench attack on the casino owner? For what? It's not like they're walking around with the casino's entire bankroll in their pocket. And let's be real, all physical business owners handling large sums of cash are in the same boat.

You never know what people desperate for money thinks. Have you not heard or read anything about those people attacked because they own some crypo? They are not even rich or own a significant amount. It may not be a $5 wrench attack against these casino owners but the danger remains when their personal info is known.

I don't know. I still believe that transparency and accountability are important principles for any business, and hiding behind anonymity can breed mistrust and suspicion. While it's true that there is always a potential for danger when personal information is known, the fact is that these types of attacks and threats are relatively rare. And I still disagree that the owners of cryptocurrency casinos would be in any more danger than the owners of traditional casinos and other physical businesses. And besides, we have laws and police to protect them, it's not like we live in the wild west.

[slapper]

I can appreciate your worries over the anonymity of the team behind crypto-gambling sites and the need for customers to undergo KYC verification. The people behind a platform should be honest and responsible for their activities, in my opinion. If they are functioning within the rules and regulations, then getting doxxed should not be a problem.

In terms of user appeal, I believe that a transparent staff might be advantageous for a gaming site. It provides customers piece of mind to know that the platform is managed by trustworthy persons and not by faceless organizations. It also facilitates improved communication and confidence between the platform and its users. However, this does not imply that anonymity is a negative thing; it might be advantageous for the platform in terms of user security and privacy. It is all about achieving equilibrium.

[ethereumhunter]

It will probably help since this sounds more like a marketing stunt to me. You have to ask if it is worth risking the security of the owners in revealing their identity over the "fairness on KYC". I'm thinking of a $5 wrench attack if a gambler is near the area of the owner.

$5 wrench attack on the casino owner? For what? It's not like they're walking around with the casino's entire bankroll in their pocket. And let's be real, all physical business owners handling large sums of cash are in the same boat.

You never know what people desperate for money thinks. Have you not heard or read anything about those people attacked because they own some crypo? They are not even rich or own a significant amount. It may not be a $5 wrench attack against these casino owners but the danger remains when their personal info is known.

I don't know. I still believe that transparency and accountability are important principles for any business, and hiding behind anonymity can breed mistrust and suspicion. While it's true that there is always a potential for danger when personal information is known, the fact is that these types of attacks and threats are relatively rare. And I still disagree that the owners of cryptocurrency casinos would be in any more danger than the owners of traditional casinos and other physical businesses. And besides, we have laws and police to protect them, it's not like we live in the wild west.

Maybe for security reasons, business owners feel no need to reveal their identity to the public and they can instruct their subordinates or someone from their team to take care of the business while the business owner is behind the business taking care of other things. We can see from the owners of several large businesses that we don't know who the business owners really are, but they have done KYC to the local regulators. So this possibility will also apply to business owners on the internet. We don't know who owns the business but they have submitted documents to the regulators.

[Apocollapse]

They have a option to not complete their KYC to built a new casino, why does they need to complete the KYC without any benefit? lol. I believe the owner or the team of the casino ever submitted their KYC on elsewhere because almost people in this world can't become 100% anonymous, at least they've made a mistake in the past.

Casino is already popular without showing the team behind the casino, after all knowing the team who create the casino doesn't really make the casino is trustworthy, just look at shitcoin scam projects.

[Outhue]

I heard it's not easy to run a licensed casino either online or offline, if you like yourself do not build a gambling haven without getting the licensed, you will be nailed so hard you will start regretting it, I believe that casinos do not need to reveal their identity because of the business they are running, if you can think about it very well they are very vulnerable to differs types of crimes if their identity is revealed.

[bettercrypto]

For me, it doesn't matter if the team management passes KYC, because first of all we customers or clients are obliged to follow the rules and policies they have. In other words, we do not have the right to dictate to the team to pass their KYC as they are asking us to do.

And in that regard, I don't see anything wrong because they are the group management team.