regulated casino or anonymous casino?

[Russlenat]

But I like a non-anonymous casino much more. To be honest, I don't see any advantages in an anonymous one. For example, there is a gambler who has been blocked everywhere. Then he will look for anonymous casinos. Hmm... then such casinos, for their own benefit, and understanding that such a gambler will not go anywhere, should take huge commissions for giving him such an opportunity to continue playing in the casino.
But I am not one of those guys and I have no problems with access or order in the casino, so of course I prefer proven large casinos that everyone knows about.

From what I’ve observed, it’s usually the regulated casinos that block gamblers,  they often use the KYC process as an excuse to freeze accounts and hold funds, which feels like a way to beat the players. So even if they’re regulated, it doesn’t mean they’re 100% trustworthy. On the other hand, anonymous casinos aren’t automatically scammers. In fact, they tend to focus on building their reputation because that’s all they have to stay competitive. Reputation is everything for them to survive in the industry.

[iv4n]

There are now many casinos marketing themselves as anonymous to attract gamblers. Just curious, which do you think is more appealing, an anonymous casino or a fully regulated casino? Share your reasons why!

Before everything, it's not possible to be totally anonymous. We can increase anonymity, but we will never be truly invisible. Maybe there are some ways to do it, but it's hard and takes a lot of knowledge & skills to do it... maybe some hackers can give us more info about it.

How To Remain Anonymous on the Internet: https://www.security.org/vpn/anonymity/

So if you don't use a VPN, an encrypted browser, and other stuff it doesn't matter whether you play at a casino with mandatory KYC or an anonymous casino... They know where you are coming from, and probably even more than that.

By the way, regulated casinos also have some licenses, so the only question is whether these licenses require all players to pass KYC or whether KYC can be requested for some reason. I like casinos where KYC is not mandatory, but I am aware that at some point & for some reason they may ask for it.

[xenomorfo]

There are now many casinos marketing themselves as anonymous to attract gamblers. Just curious, which do you think is more appealing, an anonymous casino or a fully regulated casino? Share your reasons why!

This question is very interesting and has some implications that i have thought about in the past
first of all in Italy there are very few casinos, the game is heavily controlled by the state.. if I'm not mistaken there is a casino in Venice and Champion of Italy
the problem with anonymous ones is that no one protects you in the event of a scam
It's not a small problem. For me better regulated one

[ethereumhunter]

But I like a non-anonymous casino much more. To be honest, I don't see any advantages in an anonymous one. For example, there is a gambler who has been blocked everywhere. Then he will look for anonymous casinos. Hmm... then such casinos, for their own benefit, and understanding that such a gambler will not go anywhere, should take huge commissions for giving him such an opportunity to continue playing in the casino.
But I am not one of those guys and I have no problems with access or order in the casino, so of course I prefer proven large casinos that everyone knows about.

No doubt for that we like proven large casinos and popular that everyone knows about. We can playing gambling in anonymous casinos but we must search for the popular and trusted casino so we can calm down when playing gambling on that casino. But we must understand that whether that is anonymous or regulated casino, we must limits our money that we will use so nothing bad will happen to us and only losses some money that we can afford to lose. If we found that anonymous casinos doing something suspicious, we need to moves immediately from that casinos before something bad happens. So in this matter, we need to responsible for anything we want to decide.

[Mahanton]

In the past, it was not too strict but now the regulations are different where the government oversees the crypto industry more with its regulations, so the Stake becomes very visible because these casinos grow to be large, requiring KYC is already their plan.
Not only Stake I am sure at some point in the future many casinos will require KYC because just as they have grown big in their business, regulators will look back and press KYC on these casinos.

I’m just wondering if we have any way to measure whether the number of users on Stake has decreased since they became a fully KYC-compliant casino. We have to keep in mind that this is still crypto, and most people who gamble here value complete privacy. KYC can be a deal-breaker for many. So, I’m really curious, are there still a lot of people willing to fight for their privacy by leaving fully KYC-compliant casinos? Or is it something most have just learned to accept?

They are still up and running on which if we do tend to look up on the numbers then there's no assurance that they had retained the numbers or having those decrease on players because of that KYC change. If we do really tend to look on this forum on which they had still that continous running of signature campaign on which they do have the budget or simple they do have those promotions and other marketing on which it does signifies that they are still making money or really that still making revenue because they wont really be that continuing their service or running up their platform if they werent that profitable. KYC sucks but we do know that these platforms will really be that definitely become that regulated because government wont really be that allowing that they do let these businesses slip into their hands considering that the taxes that these businesses are making is indeed huge. Crypto gambling had become that popular because of that anonymity and doesnt ask out some KYC but now it is really that gradually changing and there's nothing we can do about it because it is already that anticipated that soon they will become but of course it will be still that into your choice whether you do stay up on a platform or would be looking into other places on which there are still that platforms that doesnt ask out any verification. So it will really be that up to you whether you do stay loyal into the site that you are playing for a while or will be prioritizing anonymity above anything else.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

There are now many casinos marketing themselves as anonymous to attract gamblers. Just curious, which do you think is more appealing, an anonymous casino or a fully regulated casino? Share your reasons why!

I'm in support of a decentralized world but until we get there, it has to be regulated casino for now because of the evil things an anonymous casino will do to you.

They can run away with your funds and there's nothing you can do about it. Take a look at what the decentralized so called crypto projects are doing to their investors, now imagine what a casinos will do.

There are actually reputable one that value their reputation but the bad eggs are still dominating the Dex world. Regulated casinos won't want to scam you because they know you'll call them out and that'll be bad for business because of the power of social media this days. Before they mightn't had care but in this modern age, they know what one bad review can do to their casino.

[ajiz138]

In the past, it was not too strict but now the regulations are different where the government oversees the crypto industry more with its regulations, so the Stake becomes very visible because these casinos grow to be large, requiring KYC is already their plan.
Not only Stake I am sure at some point in the future many casinos will require KYC because just as they have grown big in their business, regulators will look back and press KYC on these casinos.

I’m just wondering if we have any way to measure whether the number of users on Stake has decreased since they became a fully KYC-compliant casino. We have to keep in mind that this is still crypto, and most people who gamble here value complete privacy. KYC can be a deal-breaker for many. So, I’m really curious, are there still a lot of people willing to fight for their privacy by leaving fully KYC-compliant casinos? Or is it something most have just learned to accept?

Heyy I guess now that a few people are fighting for their privacy eventually all the documents will be provided on the platform for users to do their activities.

Imagine if someone does KYC then Stake will give a reward of at least $50 for successful KYC, who wouldn't be tempted by that money?

Then how can those who have a high VIP level not do KYC? Of course there is no other way but to do it.
Users want to avoid privacy, so the platform will not be able to fight back.

[vd309]

In the past, it was not too strict but now the regulations are different where the government oversees the crypto industry more with its regulations, so the Stake becomes very visible because these casinos grow to be large, requiring KYC is already their plan.
Not only Stake I am sure at some point in the future many casinos will require KYC because just as they have grown big in their business, regulators will look back and press KYC on these casinos.

I’m just wondering if we have any way to measure whether the number of users on Stake has decreased since they became a fully KYC-compliant casino. We have to keep in mind that this is still crypto, and most people who gamble here value complete privacy. KYC can be a deal-breaker for many. So, I’m really curious, are there still a lot of people willing to fight for their privacy by leaving fully KYC-compliant casinos? Or is it something most have just learned to accept?

Heyy I guess now that a few people are fighting for their privacy eventually all the documents will be provided on the platform for users to do their activities.

Imagine if someone does KYC then Stake will give a reward of at least $50 for successful KYC, who wouldn't be tempted by that money?

Then how can those who have a high VIP level not do KYC? Of course there is no other way but to do it.
Users want to avoid privacy, so the platform will not be able to fight back.

I think stake have some kind of incentives for KYC-ed customers. For example some promotions are only available for level 2 verified players, for other you receive double the reward if verified.

[ajiz138]

I think stake have some kind of incentives for KYC-ed customers. For example some promotions are only available for level 2 verified players, for other you receive double the reward if verified.

Yes, it's a lucrative incentive, isn't it? Moreover, they get a second time reward, of course there will be many users flocking to do it so it will not be surprising if KYC has now become commonplace in casinos.

I even saw that with a higher VIP level and he had not done KYC then at that time if I'm not mistaken $250 will be incentivized by Stake.

[vd309]

I think stake have some kind of incentives for KYC-ed customers. For example some promotions are only available for level 2 verified players, for other you receive double the reward if verified.

Yes, it's a lucrative incentive, isn't it? Moreover, they get a second time reward, of course there will be many users flocking to do it so it will not be surprising if KYC has now become commonplace in casinos.

I even saw that with a higher VIP level and he had not done KYC then at that time if I'm not mistaken $250 will be incentivized by Stake.

That's interesting if you do it you get some kind of reward now, but in the future it might be mandatory for players from certain countries. I'm curious if they want more players verified due to regulatory reasons or they just had too many people with multi accounts abusing those promotions before.

[Fiatless]

This question is very interesting and has some implications that i have thought about in the past
first of all in Italy there are very few casinos, the game is heavily controlled by the state.. if I'm not mistaken there is a casino in Venice and Champion of Italy
the problem with anonymous ones is that no one protects you in the event of a scam
It's not a small problem. For me better regulated one

Everything that has advantages also has pitfalls. In government-regulated casinos, gamblers have some level of security. Since some of them have a physical presence and have some level of guarantee from the government, regulated casinos can be trusted more than anonymous ones. The best option will be to be careful when using casinos that are not under any regulations. Don't gamble with large amounts because recovering your money in the case of rug pulling or scam is very difficult.

If you are concerned about your privacy, use unregistered casinos, but if you want the safety of your funds and don't care much about KYC, regulated casinos will be your best bet. But doesn't in any way mean that all regulated casinos are reputable and vice versa. Some of them can be registered and still engage in criminal schemes.