Why we don't want KYC on casinos but happy to comply with banks?

[viljy]

First of all, no one is happy to show their documents even at the bank. People do this because there is simply no other alternative. Well, it's generally incorrect to compare a bank and a casino. Even if only because they have completely different licensing authorities. The bank has a license from the central bank of the country (generally), whereas the casino may have an offshore license. For a bank to lose its license means closure. For casinos, the loss of a license does not mean the end. The casino may purchase another offshore license.

By the way, the bank can still hypothetically be held accountable for leaking customer data, but it is extremely unlikely to hold the casino accountable for leaking customer personal data. Therefore, KYC in casinos has no advantages either for customers or for the casinos themselves. That's why people try to choose casinos that are loyal to their customers in this matter.

[Nathrixxx]

On a general approach, people don't like KYC, but when they have no remedy than to comply, then they go for it and accept their fate, before we could also be asked of this, we must have been in demand of something tangible form the platform used for them to have used that as a barrier before granting the request made from them, we can't say that KYC is completely bad for users, it's just a procedure to fight against counterfeit, hack or any unjust attempt or entry that may not follow due process or the laid down rules.

[cryptoaddictchie]

On a general approach, people don't like KYC, but when they have no remedy than to comply, then they go for it and accept their fate, before we could also be asked of this, we must have been in demand of something tangible form the platform used for them to have used that as a barrier before granting the request made from them, we can't say that KYC is completely bad for users, it's just a procedure to fight against counterfeit, hack or any unjust attempt or entry that may not follow due process or the laid down rules.

Thats make sense. Imagine you found out that you won huge prize for example 300k usdt worth. How can you avoid KYC if ifs being imposed of course youll do it to claim that big prize isn't it? This is something users wouldn't let slide. Even me myself would probably do KYC if necessary. It's not about being compromised but how can that be claimed if we don't follow. Actually it's quite ridicule to impose that, cause it seems they are suspicious of ourselves who playing on their site.

[Kasabus]

Thats make sense. Imagine you found out that you won huge prize for example 300k usdt worth. How can you avoid KYC if ifs being imposed of course youll do it to claim that big prize isn't it? This is something users wouldn't let slide. Even me myself would probably do KYC if necessary. It's not about being compromised but how can that be claimed if we don't follow. Actually it's quite ridicule to impose that, cause it seems they are suspicious of ourselves who playing on their site.

Implementing KYC because users are suspected of violating the TOS is wrong.
It’s like using it as a weapon to forfeit the payment, and yeah, some casinos with bad reputations do that. ( I just won't name).

But KYC in general should be implemented as a mandatory requirement, whether you win big or not. It should be part of the process from the start, not something they suddenly use against you later.

[cryptoaddictchie]

Implementing KYC because users are suspected of violating the TOS is wrong.
It’s like using it as a weapon to forfeit the payment, and yeah, some casinos with bad reputations do that. ( I just won't name).

But KYC in general should be implemented as a mandatory requirement, whether you win big or not. It should be part of the process from the start, not something they suddenly use against you later.

Yeah only imposing that rule when you already win is a bad move but as a user who won that, what choices do you have, living in a 3rd wold country of course you'll do the KYC just to get that. But that needs to change, cause it will really make users suspicious that they might be a scam one. I don't know why the norm stays as like this for gambling casino. People play there for a reason to win and if they did they will be standardised with the method.

[EarnOnVictor]

But here’s the part most people ignore: casinos usually require KYC only if they’re regulated.

I don't think regulation is the yardstick to judge the request for the KYC, as some unregulated casinos, and even the fraudulent ones hide under it to look more legit. Some also use it as an excuse not to pay their customers.

So let me ask... do you have a bank account? If yes, you’re already happily complying with KYC there. So why is trusting a licensed casino suddenly a different story?

Every adult should have a bank account, unless such is living in the forest.

As for the trust in bank and distrust in casinos, I believe that this is more of a mindset. No establishment should be trusted, but still, the home regulation might be somewhat be better trusted by some people than the online establishment that your local authority doesn't have a jurisdiction.

Aside from that, the whole privacy of a thing is too exaggerated, and most of the cryptocurrency transactions that people deem private are not so private. So long as there is an origination sources like fiats, they are easily traceable.

[bit_stacker]

I have a question for you, are crypto casinos regulated by governments? Your answer will definitely be no. So comparing casinos with banks is not a wise thing to do. That is why people avoid KYC because people are not confident in the security of the sites, if one day one of these casinos gets hacked, all your identity information will be sold on Telegram. But banks are more secure and usually do not store sensitive information online.

[Dunamisx]

I want people to realize that not only the banks and casinos that can render us vulnerable to our information, anywhere we are entitled to pass through KYC will have same implications as these aforementioned platforms that often requires us to go through their mandatory KYC procedures, once we are sure of these, then we are going to know what is at stake and should be expected of us from any platform visited.

[Dogedegen]

So let me ask... do you have a bank account? If yes, you’re already happily complying with KYC there. So why is trusting a licensed casino suddenly a different story?

A bank is a necessity in almost every country in the world, it is extremely highly regulated and has to enforce local laws. If they do something wrong you can easily sue them and win. Gambling is not a necessity, KYC in gambling is not needed and most online casinos are registered in god knows where and use who knows what kind of savings techniques when it comes to dealing with data. If something goes wrong you will be fucked with basically no real recourse in most cases. It is an entirely different story. If you don't see it as such, the problem is you.

Implementing KYC because users are suspected of violating the TOS is wrong.
It’s like using it as a weapon to forfeit the payment, and yeah, some casinos with bad reputations do that. ( I just won't name).

But KYC in general should be implemented as a mandatory requirement, whether you win big or not. It should be part of the process from the start, not something they suddenly use against you later.

No, KYC should not be implemented at all. KYC does not stop any kind of abuse or violation of TOS. When abusers really need to they can just find or pay someone to do KYC for them. It is very easy to bypass. If it does not do what it is intended to do and creates a lot of risk and potential harm then it should be completely abolished.

[coinlary]

Who said we  are happy complying with Bank's KYC policies .
It just that you have no choice  so far you would like to receive and make digital  fiat transactions, it's  regulated by a chain which will eventually leads to government  just like Casino could be controlled by government  and since we have nothing to hide right? Then we just have to go through  the process of giving out our KYC to gamble peacefully. Still, not enough  as you could  bee questioned at anytime.

[Mate2237]

You can't compare the two banks are financial institutions that are saddled with the responsibility of keeping the money of the public, and so it good that they know the people that they are keeping their money.again banks have physical structure were you can visit them when ever something goes wrong in the process but these online Casinos doesn't have a place were you can actually locate them. Banks have been able to build a level of trust over the years so people are naturally more comfortable with releasing their KYC to the banks more than Casino's.




Online Casinos really lacks the trust of the public because, there have been several scam which has taken place with Online casinos. Some of these Casinos has even closed down and refused to pay their customers so if Casinos can do these types of things there is high tendency of your information getting compromised with them.

[mirakal]

Implementing KYC because users are suspected of violating the TOS is wrong.
It’s like using it as a weapon to forfeit the payment, and yeah, some casinos with bad reputations do that. ( I just won't name).

It’s hard not to notice this because it’s really happening, but most of the casinos doing it are the ones with bad reputations and multiple scam accusations already. The sad part is users can’t really defend themselves, since casinos can easily fabricate proof or create their own version of events. And it’s hard to verify anything because we’re limited in the amount of information they’re willing to share.

But KYC in general should be implemented as a mandatory requirement, whether you win big or not. It should be part of the process from the start, not something they suddenly use against you later.

That how it should work.

I don't think regulation is the yardstick to judge the request for the KYC, as some unregulated casinos, and even the fraudulent ones hide under it to look more legit. Some also use it as an excuse not to pay their customers.

Crash out those unregulated casinos here. You’d be a fool to comply with their demands knowing the casino isn’t even licensed.

Every adult should have a bank account, unless such is living in the forest.

As for the trust in bank and distrust in casinos, I believe that this is more of a mindset. No establishment should be trusted, but still, the home regulation might be somewhat be better trusted by some people than the online establishment that your local authority doesn't have a jurisdiction.

Aside from that, the whole privacy of a thing is too exaggerated, and most of the cryptocurrency transactions that people deem private are not so private. So long as there is an origination sources like fiats, they are easily traceable.

For the sake of fairness in the comparison, think of it like you’re comparing a bank and an online casino that are both licensed in your country and both owned by locals.

Would you treat them the same way?

[summonerrk]

This KYC thing is really unappreciated here, mostly because a lot of us want freedom. Crypto casinos were supposed to give anonymity so we don’t feel like the government is watching every move we make. That’s the whole appeal in the first place.

But here’s the part most people ignore: casinos usually require KYC only if they’re regulated. It’s not because they want your info for fun, it’s because their license depends on it. If they don’t follow that mandate, their operation gets shut down.

So let me ask... do you have a bank account? If yes, you’re already happily complying with KYC there. So why is trusting a licensed casino suddenly a different story?

It's true, everyone's sensitive about KYC on exchanges and casinos, but they're completely relaxed about it because banks require it. But what choice do they have? I can't imagine life without a bank card. The statistics for my city for the year are as follows: Non-cash transactions accounted for 97.5% of 100 percent, including 87.4% for payments for goods and services, 9.4% for transfers to other people, and 0.1% for mandatory payments to the state. Everyone uses cards. And I admit that I've become accustomed to completing KYC at casinos, without even thinking about it, but only for those listed on our forum.

[dunfida]

This KYC thing is really unappreciated here, mostly because a lot of us want freedom. Crypto casinos were supposed to give anonymity so we don’t feel like the government is watching every move we make. That’s the whole appeal in the first place.

But here’s the part most people ignore: casinos usually require KYC only if they’re regulated. It’s not because they want your info for fun, it’s because their license depends on it. If they don’t follow that mandate, their operation gets shut down.

So let me ask... do you have a bank account? If yes, you’re already happily complying with KYC there. So why is trusting a licensed casino suddenly a different story?

It's true, everyone's sensitive about KYC on exchanges and casinos, but they're completely relaxed about it because banks require it. But what choice do they have? I can't imagine life without a bank card. The statistics for my city for the year are as follows: Non-cash transactions accounted for 97.5% of 100 percent, including 87.4% for payments for goods and services, 9.4% for transfers to other people, and 0.1% for mandatory payments to the state. Everyone uses cards. And I admit that I've become accustomed to completing KYC at casinos, without even thinking about it, but only for those listed on our forum.

We are all that sensitive when it comes to KYC on which it will be that totally understandable because we dont want to expose our important information but since we are talking about banks then we would be having that kind of confidence that they will be able to keep our information safe on which it is totally opposite if we do speak about on other places like with casinos on which at the time that they are asking our information then we do feel out that those date arent that safe to them on which just like been said by others that its just that the same. There's no way that we can be so sure that those informations will be keep safe forever but there's always that kind of indifference on how we do feel out in between places in regarding about submitting our KYC.

There are still some casinos on which you can still that play anonymously but still you wont be that able to be so sure on how long it would be like that? We've known that these kind or type of businesses are that generating tons of profits or revenue on which its always be that in default that government will be trying out to squeeze taxes as much as possible and thats why they would be needing up to comply for them to continue to operate.

[sompitonov]

This KYC thing is really unappreciated here, mostly because a lot of us want freedom. Crypto casinos were supposed to give anonymity so we don’t feel like the government is watching every move we make. That’s the whole appeal in the first place.

But here’s the part most people ignore: casinos usually require KYC only if they’re regulated. It’s not because they want your info for fun, it’s because their license depends on it. If they don’t follow that mandate, their operation gets shut down.

So let me ask... do you have a bank account? If yes, you’re already happily complying with KYC there. So why is trusting a licensed casino suddenly a different story?

It's true, everyone's sensitive about KYC on exchanges and casinos, but they're completely relaxed about it because banks require it. But what choice do they have? I can't imagine life without a bank card. The statistics for my city for the year are as follows: Non-cash transactions accounted for 97.5% of 100 percent, including 87.4% for payments for goods and services, 9.4% for transfers to other people, and 0.1% for mandatory payments to the state. Everyone uses cards. And I admit that I've become accustomed to completing KYC at casinos, without even thinking about it, but only for those listed on our forum.

I also complete the KYC for casinos that interest me and that I'm used to. However, for me, a casino needs to stand out in some way to make me want to register there today and immediately complete the KYC process. In any case, it's difficult for new casinos to maintain a steady flow of customers because competition is constant, and only good bonuses can lure players in to try their luck there. But again, it's extremely difficult to attract players because they're used to visiting their favorite casino regularly. They may even have a loyalty level and cashback there that they don't want to lose by switching to other casinos.

[EarnOnVictor]

Crash out those unregulated casinos here. You’d be a fool to comply with their demands knowing the casino isn’t even licensed.

It depends on how you see it, people do it a lot, and many of these casinos you see that are regulated are under the weakest regulation, where no one will fight for you, so what are we talking about? Some casinos are also operating under fake licenses, so what makes so much difference if a casino is clear about its unregulated status, but still ask you for KYC for AML and record purposes. I see nothing foolish in that, it is a choice, and people patronise them.

This regulation of a thing in casino is even overhyped than it actually is. Have you seen cases where regulators fought for customers and not their pockets?

[summonerrk]

This KYC thing is really unappreciated here, mostly because a lot of us want freedom. Crypto casinos were supposed to give anonymity so we don’t feel like the government is watching every move we make. That’s the whole appeal in the first place.

But here’s the part most people ignore: casinos usually require KYC only if they’re regulated. It’s not because they want your info for fun, it’s because their license depends on it. If they don’t follow that mandate, their operation gets shut down.

So let me ask... do you have a bank account? If yes, you’re already happily complying with KYC there. So why is trusting a licensed casino suddenly a different story?

It's true, everyone's sensitive about KYC on exchanges and casinos, but they're completely relaxed about it because banks require it. But what choice do they have? I can't imagine life without a bank card. The statistics for my city for the year are as follows: Non-cash transactions accounted for 97.5% of 100 percent, including 87.4% for payments for goods and services, 9.4% for transfers to other people, and 0.1% for mandatory payments to the state. Everyone uses cards. And I admit that I've become accustomed to completing KYC at casinos, without even thinking about it, but only for those listed on our forum.

I also complete the KYC for casinos that interest me and that I'm used to. However, for me, a casino needs to stand out in some way to make me want to register there today and immediately complete the KYC process. In any case, it's difficult for new casinos to maintain a steady flow of customers because competition is constant, and only good bonuses can lure players in to try their luck there. But again, it's extremely difficult to attract players because they're used to visiting their favorite casino regularly. They may even have a loyalty level and cashback there that they don't want to lose by switching to other casinos.

Casinos should treat their players who agree to undergo KYC with the utmost care and tact. This demonstrates that gamblers truly trust the casino and are willing to entrust them with the storage and processing of their documents. Casinos should not pester such players with demands for additional documents, even after large wins.
They should also offer bonus programs unavailable to gamblers who don't undergo KYC. This will establish the partnerships that casinos crave.

[Fredomago]

Crash out those unregulated casinos here. You’d be a fool to comply with their demands knowing the casino isn’t even licensed.

It depends on how you see it, people do it a lot, and many of these casinos you see that are regulated are under the weakest regulation, where no one will fight for you, so what are we talking about? Some casinos are also operating under fake licenses, so what makes so much difference if a casino is clear about its unregulated status, but still ask you for KYC for AML and record purposes. I see nothing foolish in that, it is a choice, and people patronise them.

This regulation of a thing in casino is even overhyped than it actually is. Have you seen cases where regulators fought for customers and not their pockets?

They care about the money that they'll be able to earned from the business that they put up, there's nothing more important but the potential earnings so in terms of fighting for their clients, they'll let that go as there's a possibilities that they'll spend for that, if they are using fake license or if they are not really true to their claims then what to expect from them right? more on finding good place to gamble casino that you already know well and you are comfortable to entrust your personal information.

[Dogedegen]

For the sake of fairness in the comparison, think of it like you’re comparing a bank and an online casino that are both licensed in your country and both owned by locals.

Would you treat them the same way?

Of course not, they are entirely subject to different laws. You're asking a very weird question because it implies that whomever you give your documents to in the same country it is the same. It does not matter what type of company it is. This is obviously not true.

It's true, everyone's sensitive about KYC on exchanges and casinos, but they're completely relaxed about it because banks require it. But what choice do they have? I can't imagine life without a bank card. The statistics for my city for the year are as follows: Non-cash transactions accounted for 97.5% of 100 percent, including 87.4% for payments for goods and services, 9.4% for transfers to other people, and 0.1% for mandatory payments to the state. Everyone uses cards. And I admit that I've become accustomed to completing KYC at casinos, without even thinking about it, but only for those listed on our forum.

You can't imagine life without a bank card? Man they have really gotten to you and brainwashed you. I use cash except where it is absolutely not possible. Legal employment and rent usually require a bank account, everything else can be done with cash. Just because everyone is doing it that does not mean it is the right thing to do. You are basically being surveilled 24/7 and you are happy about it and even fighting for your right to be surveilled. Brainwashing can really go deep.

This regulation of a thing in casino is even overhyped than it actually is. Have you seen cases where regulators fought for customers and not their pockets?

It is very rare for a regulator to go after a casino for things other than money related crime. It may happen but extremely rarely that they would go after them for lax data protection practices so yeah you are right. The comparison here does not make sense at all. Anyways depending on the case and the laws of the country in question the regulators may go after a casino but the casino will get away with a small fine after a very lengthy process or they may avoid the fine altogether. Generally I am not satisfied with consumer protection even in over regulated places like the European Union. Usually countries are split into 2 groups on this matter. Too little regulation and enforcement or too much regulation but still designed in a way to preserve the rich man and owners at the expense of the customers.

[moneystery]

Perhaps it's a regulatory issue that makes more people feel safer handing over their identities to banks. Typically, banks are directly supervised and regulated by authorities, so their operations are directly monitored domestically, providing a sense of security for customers. As for online casinos, most companies are registered in countries with looser regulations, and you simply won't know what they're doing with your data once you register.
But I personally don't have a problem handing over my identity to a casino. As long as I see that they have a good reputation and are regulated, it's fine for me. However, it's preferable if they don't ask for it, as I expect to be able to play anonymously without KYC if possible.