Enforceability of self exclusion in no KYC casinos

[alani123]

As you know, many casinos that deal primarily with crypto don't have any KYC requirements.
But then again, something that has become a standard in the industry, voluntary exclusion, is very hard to become enforced.

Even Anjuan has started offering self exclusion and promoting it to the casinos they license. Those with experience in the scene will know that Anjuan licenses are just title licenses and don't offer much regulatory oversight as the Comoros where Anjuan is located is a small nation consisting of Islands and can't really offer regulatory oversight or protection. They license overseas casinos just as a source of revenue. But even they show a gesture of goodwill and allow players to send their data so casinos can exclude them.

But it's something that just would be very hard to implement based on a no KYC casino. Exclusion can also happen based on email address or just username but still the effect is not the same as these can be replaced very easily. And since crypto is anonymous there's also no way to enforce not accepting payments.

In the end, the only realistic way to be excluded from a casino that is crypto based is to close your account. Many don't even offer an automatic option and you have to ask them to ban your account. Sometimes they can even refuse to just do that!

But even if you're banned from a no-KYC crypto casino then you can just create a new account, deposit some coin, and start playing instantly...

In the end, the only real escape is trying to cure oneself from addiction. Self exclusion is a very inadequate solution with how the industry works today. I think governments should also invest more on services to counter addiction with all the revenue they get from gambling.

What are your thoughts on this?

[yahoo62278]

While I do think that self exclusion should be a thing that works on every casino, I think the player themselves needs to be held more accountable for their actions. Let's be serious here, addicted players would figure out how to play whether the self exclusion worked or didn't work. They'll find a new casino to play on or create a new account.

The casino's that the self exclusion doesn't work on face a wave of scam accusations from players who used the self exclusion and lost and now want a refund for the self exclusion not working knowing damn well they would have found a way to play even if the self exclusion worked.

It would be better for casino's if self exclusion wasn't a thing at all and people were held accountable for their own actions.

[Dogedegen]

In the end, the only real escape is trying to cure oneself from addiction. Self exclusion is a very inadequate solution with how the industry works today. I think governments should also invest more on services to counter addiction with all the revenue they get from gambling.

What are your thoughts on this?

For me the concept of self exclusion was never a good solution, it was a bureaucratic burden on casinos that does not really benefit many people. So instead of people getting a grip on their addiction, they shift the burden on others to make adjustments for their own addiction. How is that good? Also how does it work with online casinos even where there is KYC. What are you going to do, send your data to every single casino on the internet to exclude you? It doesn't really work as you can ban yourself from 1 casino and there are hundreds of others seconds away. So I don't think these casinos should do anything like that other than have easy options for account deletion, because as you have said it even makes less in no KYC casinos as you can come back under a new username or email the next day or even the same day. Instead we should shift the issues relating to addiction to the people that are addicted.

While I do think that self exclusion should be a thing that works on every casino, I think the player themselves needs to be held more accountable for their actions. Let's be serious here, addicted players would figure out how to play whether the self exclusion worked or didn't work. They'll find a new casino to play on or create a new account.

The casino's that the self exclusion doesn't work on face a wave of scam accusations from players who used the self exclusion and lost and now want a refund for the self exclusion not working knowing damn well they would have found a way to play even if the self exclusion worked.

It would be better for casino's if self exclusion wasn't a thing at all and people were held accountable for their own actions.

Nice you posted this while I was writing my post, and I completely agree with you. I think it provides only the illusion of working but in practice it does not do much. It is like asking a supermarket to ban you from buying sugar products but there are hundreds of supermarkets in the city in which you live. What does that do? You can go around the ban without any issue. Self accountability is the solution and those that can't fix themselves it is sad but it is not our problem. Other people should not have to suffer any changes or extra issues because a few can't get their life in order.

[kotajikikox]

Self exclusion is just something to help a gambling addict but not necessarily the one and true cure of it all. Governments should definitely establish more rehabilitation programs for gambling addicts. There should also be more support groups for those who want to start their journey or have already recovered to avoid relapses.

[ryzaadit]

Doesn't mean the player are can't manage themself?

I mean, you can make a 1000 ways to prevent everyone are addicted or part of gambling safety measure for all player. That's not gonna to work, If the player or your self don't have any self-controls.

Self excluded from casino already a things, but we somehow know thats either player are register with new account, playing on other casino or looking some way to gambling cause they don't have any self control.

[Findingnemo]

Players are taking advantage of no KYC thing or even if the casino is KYC mandatory, one can still bypass the self-exclusion in other ways. So the real solution is to stop gambling on their own and there is no substitute for that. To be honest casinos want the players to keep coming that is how they make money and we can't blame anyone because it is just business for them and users who don't want to get int trouble should know how to take care of themselves first.

[Cointxz]

In the end, the only real escape is trying to cure oneself from addiction. Self exclusion is a very inadequate solution with how the industry works today. I think governments should also invest more on services to counter addiction with all the revenue they get from gambling.

What are your thoughts on this?

It’s true for an online casino since there’s a lot of way to still gamble despite having different way to restrict someone account due to casino accessibility.

It’s a band aid solution that requires self cooperation on dealing personal addiction.

Personally, some of this self exclusion feature is helpful to me such as the wager, loss and deposit limit because I always focus on playing on single casino. With limits imposed, my gambling was shutdown because I don’t want to start again on different casino or new account.

[Bitcoin.com97]

Self exclusion is just something to help a gambling addict but not necessarily the one and true cure of it all. Governments should definitely establish more rehabilitation programs for gambling addicts. There should also be more support groups for those who want to start their journey or have already recovered to avoid relapses.

This opinion is valid, self exclusion can’t help an addicted gambling entirely, it’s just like been aware and trying to banned yourself from some gambling activities but without anyone watching closely , an addicted gambler may go back to their activities, I think going for a therapy session is also important, to learn and be educated about the dangers involves, they should also be taken to rehabilitation center just the way drug addict are been taken to , dealing with a gambling addiction is not a joke , and should be taken care with every possible means .

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

As you know, many casinos that deal primarily with crypto don't have any KYC requirements.

Mostly it is a click bait advertisement while operationally, KYC required.

But even if you're banned from a no-KYC crypto casino then you can just create a new account, deposit some coin, and start playing instantly...

In the end, the only real escape is trying to cure oneself from addiction. Self exclusion is a very inadequate solution with how the industry works today. I think governments should also invest more on services to counter addiction with all the revenue they get from gambling.

What are your thoughts on this?

About self-exclusion, I see some latest cases in Scam accusation board against some casino brands. If a company has terms about self-exclusion especially if there are legal regulations on this matter, those companies have to support their customers by promptly self-exclusion when requested by their users. If they don't do that quickly for users, and let their users continue with bets, then lose more money, it's their business operational fault and might lead to law case.

On user side, they must be responsible themselves and must know that the self-exclusion feature on casinos is only a support tool and they can not depend on it for management of their money. They can have self exclusion on one casino but they can easily bet on other casinos if they are irresponsible.

I can be wrong but I think some accusations are like trying to exploit casinos because individually I think it's quite wrong to continue with bets while a person sees it is risky for finance.

[maydna]

Self exclusion will not works if gamblers don't want to limit themselves while casinos have this feature on their site. Even if they ask casinos closing their account, that doesn't mean gamblers will really leaves the casinos.

They can return to casinos someday continuing their gambling activities and only those who can limit themselves will really cares that they needs to stop gambling. Gamblers need responsible with their gambling habit so they will not get addicted and use gambling for fun.

[Mhizlove]

Self exclusion is just something to help a gambling addict but not necessarily the one and true cure of it all. Governments should definitely establish more rehabilitation programs for gambling addicts. There should also be more support groups for those who want to start their journey or have already recovered to avoid relapses.

True self exclusion can help block access but it do not solve anything inside the person's mind. To recover people need those that will listen, Will check them frequently and guide them. If support groups, community and family joins hands with a proper rehab programs it will be very easier to stay on track and no going back won't be a problem because addiction is not just a one man thing or it's not left for one man to fight it alone. support system is the real foundation

[Somegory]

Self exclusion is just something to help a gambling addict but not necessarily the one and true cure of it all. Governments should definitely establish more rehabilitation programs for gambling addicts. There should also be more support groups for those who want to start their journey or have already recovered to avoid relapses.

Self exclusion my foot, this idea is trapping casinos into cases where addicted gamblers are holding them responsible, I read a thread where the addicted gambler is blaming the casino because the self exclusion period that's given is lower.

This crazy being waited for the time to pass, few months down the line and started gambling again then he lost all his money and wants to sue the online casino, I hope he never gets his ways because people think only about themselves and not others.

If you are addicted to gambling and you are looking for solutions, stop gambling or tell people around you to guide you right, even if it will result in locking you up in a room and starving your ass of gambling for weeks.

[viljy]

Self-exclusion is sometimes used as a way of abuse. The client declares his addiction and demands lifelong self-exclusion. Let's say the casino provides only temporary self-exclusion, according to the TOS. Then the client declares that it does not suit him, refuses to exclude himself, and continues to gamble. If the client wins, he silently takes the winnings. And if he loses, he starts to make a fuss, demanding a refund, arguing that there was the very fact of a statement about gambling addiction and a requirement for self-exclusion.

In other words, gambling addiction began to provide exceptional privileges (to protest losses). Does kleptomania provide immunity from criminal liability? There is such a mental disorder - homicidomania (Pichushkin) - does this give you the privilege to kill? Excessive paternalism (which is where the practice of self-exclusion comes from) in relation to gambling addicts only increases their irresponsibility, and most importantly, is completely ineffective, and also creates the ground for fraud.

[TopTort777]

Self exclusion is just something to help a gambling addict but not necessarily the one and true cure of it all. Governments should definitely establish more rehabilitation programs for gambling addicts. There should also be more support groups for those who want to start their journey or have already recovered to avoid relapses.

Its not government responsibility to cure persons stupidity and try to change his character. Why would government even bother about it if gambling industry bring billions in taxes? Do you think rehabilitation programs will work? They start working when there is already problem, but addiction imho must be prevented before it has even formed. To prevent formation of addiction, gambler must be monitored during his playthrough and gambling experience, but gambler will never agree for that.

[swogerino]

There are casinos who only verify email addresses and phone numbers which do not constitute a true KYC as they cannot come to your real identity. So even such casinos have their self exclusion as an option and no KYC casinos should have this option too, it helps a lot and I am talking from my personal experience as I have excluded myself for an indefinite amount of time from many casinos and my options to play again are extremely few so definitely should be implemented to any casino this life saving option.

[fullfitlarry]

Both should have accountability in my opinion.

1. Gamblers who says that they don't want to play anymore, should not test the casino by getting their own account back or creating a new one to play and then blame the casino for allowing them to go back again

2. Casino themselves. Once they include those individual, they shouldn't allow them to create any accounts by checking everything like IP address or anything that they can link or identify that individual.

[Karl_3000]

But even if you're banned from a no-KYC crypto casino then you can just create a new account, deposit some coin, and start playing instantly...

Another thing is that if a casino is making KYC mandatory and someone that go for self exclusion can feel like gambling and register on another gambling site which require KYC or not requiring KYC. Self exclusion is not really useful on online gambling unless the gambler does not know any other gambling site.

[joeperry]

I get what you're trying to say, it's true that even if there's a self exclusion in crypto related gambling site they can just use VPN and create a new account. I have a solution for that but this method is really strict, I tried it in my old laptop and you can't even open a platform with a word "gambling" on it including our forum and even use crypto exchange site, so it's really hassle and I literally delete my OS and install a new one to remove it since it was I think installed in the root of my computer or something (sorry not too technical).

The software is called BetBlocker and it's free to use but it's really an aggressive one since it over blocks anything even slightly related words and it really slows down the internet as I think the website you're going to open will be checked by their server first or something.

[Oasisman]

I think the issues about casinos who refuse or offer temporary self exclusion has becoming more common these days, and I think some people may have done it deliberately as they found this a loophole that they can use to make a claim legally later on after they lost.

IMO, self exclusion is supposed to be a temporary fix if a player noticed he's becoming frequently engaged into gambling. If a player doesn't want to deal with gambling anymore, then the right option for that is to close the account. But then again, in a crypto casino, this won't really matter that much, because they can always create an new account anytime.
For the casinos to make themselves legally safe from claims like these, they should start considering/honoring requests like these from the players.

[davis196]

In the end, the only real escape is trying to cure oneself from addiction. Self exclusion is a very inadequate solution with how the industry works today. I think governments should also invest more on services to counter addiction with all the revenue they get from gambling.

What are your thoughts on this?

Wow, you have come to the right conclusion, which makes this forum thread kinda pointless, since the topic of self-exclusion has been discussed over a thousand times in the last few years. Self-exclusion is like a door in an open field. It clearly doesn't help in battling gambling addiction, but it's still there. It exists... At the end of the day, what matters the most is the ability of gambling addicts to take back control over their lives and their ability to make healthy decisions. Self-exclusion in crypto casinos won't help them that much. It doesn't matter if the casinos are KYC or non-KYC.