Does anyone here actually use self-exclusion in casinos?

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Most casinos now have a self-exclusion feature. On paper it sounds good, but I’m honestly curious who actually uses it.

I find it a bit useless. If someone is already addicted, do you really expect them to stop and apply for self-exclusion?
At that point the priority is to play and try to win back losses, not to fill out a restriction form.

So does this feature really help, or is it just there so casinos can say they’re being “responsible”? Curious to hear real experiences, if any.

Well, to be very honest, and sorry to any casino this may hurt, I've always felt that the self exclusion feature is simply there so that casino can say they are encouraging responsible gambling, and though Ive read a couple of times from users who claim to have used the self exclusion feature on casinos they gambled on, I do not think this feature actually have the power to stop the user from Gambling.

There are thousands of casinos out there online, and if we are to talk about the offline physical casinos, we can't number them from country to country, and there is basically no way a gambler will self exclude from every single casino in the world and quit gambling completely as a result.
When a gambler excludes from one casino, they have a good chance of registering on another casino and continuing with their gambling activities, at this point, their excluding their self from the other casino is completely useless, so this feature doesn't actually do anything to be honest.

[danherbias07]

It will still depend on the gambler's discipline.

Self-exclusion is there to serve as a pause to the gamblers addiction and I think it does help a little. One day of rest, without gambling at all, can really help a gambler forget about it. Especially to those who are not really drunk to gambling yet but they are on their way there. I think it will be a good option for them to use the said feature so they can avoid getting drowned in gambling.
It's not just because the online casino has to follow the rules of the government by offering it, but I think there are also some good stories out there where a gambler stopped gambling thanks to it.

[KTChampions]

Most casinos now have a self-exclusion feature. On paper it sounds good, but I’m honestly curious who actually uses it.

I find it a bit useless. If someone is already addicted, do you really expect them to stop and apply for self-exclusion?
At that point the priority is to play and try to win back losses, not to fill out a restriction form.

So does this feature really help, or is it just there so casinos can say they’re being “responsible”? Curious to hear real experiences, if any.

I don't know, maybe someone actually uses this option and finds it useful, but 99.99% of the time it exists only to formally comply with the requirements of fucking regulators. It's typical useless crap, but then regulators can convince the public that they're doing something useful, casinos can claim that they're complying with regulators' requirements, and players... players don't care. By the way, it is quite possible that this ultimately worsens the user experience, since the casino has to protect itself from potential fraud that can occur here and, as a result, they are stricter with ordinary users.

[Findingnemo]

IMO, it is not going to help 99.9% of the users, they will simply switch to new one when their urge to gamble is back but this self exlcusion is mandated to have for the casinos by the license providers so they have and still people use it.

Self exclusion brings a lot of troubles for both sides too, if a casino is in self exclusion period but if they tried to register new account there will result into banning of both the accounts and their funds will be held forever by the casino.

[Sammye3]

So exclusion to me is useless if the gambler in question has failed to learn self discipline and abstinence when needed. It's easy for the gambler to move to another casino after self exclusion which does not solve the issue of addiction.

Personally,  I have not used the self exclusion option before in either sports betting or casino because I find it a bit deceiving and makes me reluctant for adjustments in my betting lifestyle,  because i would only need a self exclusion when I think I'm getting addicted.

[FirmWars]

Most casinos now have a self-exclusion feature. On paper it sounds good, but I’m honestly curious who actually uses it.

I'm really curious too to know how this self-exclusion feature also work, you are correct saying that the description of self-exclusion feature sounds good on paper but in reality, I have not used it and I've not seen someone that used it too. What I'm assuming is that if the exclusion  feature is developed very well in such a way that the gambler will be allowed to deposit their money but won't be allowed to gamble, then it will prevent some minor cases of addiction. If they will also prevent the gambler from depositing on their casino during the period of exclusion, it will leave the gambler no option except to wait for their exclusion period to be over. Will be better understood if someone that has used it before now mentions how it helped them and also the casino that they used.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

I've been hearing a lot talking about self exclusion in gambling, but I don't know how effective this could be when it comes to applying it to our own self and see that it's really works, will the gambling platform also enable what will also stop them from having our patronage to their platform and Gamble? Instead, they are more convinced that they would rather do what will help them get more users engaged on their platform for their own advantage, except with take it a responsibility and personally engaged ourselves on what could prevent us from gambling and make the whole intention come I reality.

[Gozie51]

It's a useless feature too, in my own viewpoint, and the casino just added it just to feel safe in the hand of regulators, or it's part of the licensing requirement; if not, they themselves know it's not working.

Sure because at the end of the day, you still find yourself going back to your vomit hehehe. The feature is always there staring at you and you could just go back to it at will whenever the urge comes back. For example, it could work better if you have exhausted your funds but if you have resource, you are back playing. That is not a feature to help a gambler to support themselves out of addiction because it is just a temporal measure used especially when you don't have funds  

[Orpichukwu]

It's a useless feature too, in my own viewpoint, and the casino just added it just to feel safe in the hand of regulators, or it's part of the licensing requirement; if not, they themselves know it's not working.

Sure because at the end of the day, you still find yourself going back to your vomit hehehe. The feature is always there staring at you and you could just go back to it at will whenever the urge comes back. For example, it could work better if you have exhausted your funds but if you have resource, you are back playing. That is not a feature to help a gambler to support themselves out of addiction because it is just a temporal measure used especially when you don't have funds  

Even if the gambler has exhausted his or her fund and the urge to gamble is still there, it will be hard for them to give up. Some addicted gamblers have sold their properties just to be able to raise money for gambling. The best is just for them to figure out a way to solve their addiction problem because if they are still addicted, they don't allow anything to prevent them from gambling.

[r_victory]

For me, it was never necessary, and I don't believe it solves the problem of someone addicted to gambling. As I've said in other discussions on this subject, casinos are plentiful, and it's easy to create a new account on another platform. I also think the feature is a legal requirement that casinos are obligated to offer.

[panjul07]

Useless or not depending on the gamblers themselves but for me I do not need this feature since I can control myself when to start and when to stop.
In general, self exclusion is just a feature to start at a point in a specific casino, but gamblers has their own freewill on what to do next.
If they really want to stop, they do not need self exclusion feature but they as the main point above, it can be used as a starting point.
Self exclusion is not also for addicted gambler but for all gamblers who want to limit themselves while trying to be resposible as much as they can.

[terrific]

Most casinos now have a self-exclusion feature. On paper it sounds good, but I’m honestly curious who actually uses it.

I find it a bit useless. If someone is already addicted, do you really expect them to stop and apply for self-exclusion?
At that point the priority is to play and try to win back losses, not to fill out a restriction form.

So does this feature really help, or is it just there so casinos can say they’re being “responsible”? Curious to hear real experiences, if any.

I have seen those who have done it and posted it here but it looks no help for them at all.
And that's because they can still gamble after that self exclusion and they want an all out ban from the casino where they do that.
There's still a lot of confusion of how it works but somehow who's willing to get out of gambling at that time, really just need to take a break and be away from their gadgets.

[Porfirii]

I have also seen them and also tested for a few reviews in the past, but fortunately apart from that experience I have never needed to make use of them because I could not contain myself or reasons of that kind.

They work as they should, and regardless of the real usefulness they have, the lack of which some criticize, I think it is an interesting functionality that says a lot about the sites that implement it, and I hope to continue seeing this option on the casinos I visit.

[aioc]

I find it a bit useless. If someone is already addicted, do you really expect them to stop and apply for self-exclusion?
At that point the priority is to play and try to win back losses, not to fill out a restriction form.

I only got to fully understand this self-exclusion because of the many threads here, but I read it on some of the terms in the casinos I'm playing.
I find it pretty useless because stopping should be at your own control, not on the casinos, because with many online casinos around, you'll get tempted to play because the urge is still there, control that urge, and you don't need an outside source to do it for you.
I think that self-exclusion is for regulatory compliance, but it's not the answer to your addiction.

[salad daging]

I find it a bit useless. If someone is already addicted, do you really expect them to stop and apply for self-exclusion?
At that point the priority is to play and try to win back losses, not to fill out a restriction form.

I don't know if this feature is useful or not because I never tried self-exclusion in a casino, maybe that user can self-exclude in this casino while in other casinos they can open and play again right? Unless someone only uses 1 casino that has this feature.

Besides, not all casinos have the self-exclusion feature that I know of, only a few casinos, for me also this is not useful at all while for other people it might be useful so the casino provides this feature.

[mikel_012]

I actually used it a couple of times, just like what @dimonstrationDT2 said, I used it when I experience a couple of unrealistic lose streak (which I know is possible) and before I fully exclude myself I actually try another one and if it's the same unrealistic result, that's the time that I exclude myself because I know that there are tendency that I will try to win back or test that game again. Not only regarding that but there are times when I was new in gambling that I couldn't control myself to deposit whenever I'm losing and the only way to stop it is to exclude myself in the site before I make more damage to myself (financially).

Did you never go try another casino even when you was blocked because of self exclusion?

I think it's a little useful if you are addicted, but can't people just create accounts in new casinos to prevent this block? I think it's like drying the ocean, you can never prevent anyone completely because they will come back when they miss gambling

[Mindyspace]

I partially agree. For those who are already fully addicted, self-exclusion is almost useless, because the logic of addiction is precisely to ignore consequences.
But for those who are almost addicted or impulsive, it can be an important psychological barrier. The problem is that casinos use this more as responsible gambling marketing than as a serious protection policy.

[stadus]

For me, I’d honestly rather just stop on my own than rely on self-exclusion. I’ve been addicted before, so I know how it feels, and I don’t really need support from casinos to deal with that. To me, it’s like asking help from the same thing that already beat you, there’s just no pride in that, at least that’s how I see it.

That’s why I think from the very start, when casinos already put out those “responsible gambling” warnings, the responsibility should really be on us.
We should already know where to draw the line.

[Darker45]

~snip~

I was addicted to gambling before, I know all the stages. I will let you know that the feature can not help, who is going to later become addicted to gambling will later become addicted to gambling. The person can go for self-exclusion but he will be the one that will make use of another gambling site. This will only make him use more gambling sites instead.

Or is it possible it just wasn't effective in your case but it was in others?

I was thinking if a gambler can still exert an effort to prevent his/her addiction--if we can clinically call it that already--from getting worse, then it isn't the kind of urge that's uncontrollable. To somebody who's already addicted, perhaps to even imagine to deprive himself/herself of that which he/she's already dependent on is more than enough to make him/her panic.

[impulse709]

Most casinos now have a self-exclusion feature. On paper it sounds good, but I’m honestly curious who actually uses it.

I find it a bit useless. If someone is already addicted, do you really expect them to stop and apply for self-exclusion?
At that point the priority is to play and try to win back losses, not to fill out a restriction form.

So does this feature really help, or is it just there so casinos can say they’re being “responsible”? Curious to hear real experiences, if any.

I don't know, maybe someone actually uses this option and finds it useful, but 99.99% of the time it exists only to formally comply with the requirements of fucking regulators. It's typical useless crap, but then regulators can convince the public that they're doing something useful, casinos can claim that they're complying with regulators' requirements, and players... players don't care. By the way, it is quite possible that this ultimately worsens the user experience, since the casino has to protect itself from potential fraud that can occur here and, as a result, they are stricter with ordinary users.

I believe that both statements are possible simultaneously. As a very addicted gambler, self-exclusion is not likely to be pro-actively taken since as you said the addiction to carry on playing normally dictates over everything. To that extent, it is like a box-ticking exercise to regulators and casinos. Nevertheless, it is not entirely useless, in my opinion. There are players who do strike a chord following a dismal defeat and self-exclusion turns out to be the final fortification. It is not a cure, but some sort of speed bump. The fact is that the problem is that casinos are overrelying on it rather than supporting more responsible-gaming initiatives that are non-problematic.