Would it be nice to see a body or agency for gambling self exclusion?

[swogerino]

How will this body get the data of gamblers from a NoKYC casino or from Polymarket because I know that we still have addicted gamblers betting in Polymarket.

The fact is that quitting from gambling or going on a long term break all depends on the gambler determination because if he's desperate to be self excluded, he can do that manually and do it sincerely.

Exactly. In the end it all depends on the determination of the gambler himself. Personally I have taken such decisions in a heat and sometimes I regret as I have quit myself from a casino in which I was a lot of levels up and had good ongoing bonuses, but these really bad losing sessions made me quit indefinitely and as such have no more access there. On another hand I have better things to do in life rather than trying my luck on casinos which I have come to the conclusion they are normally designed against the users if we keep playing games of luck. Only sport betting and poker can give us somewhat of a chance to be profitable over the long run yet I see it as very difficult.

[robelneo]

Some questions are whether it is mandatory for casinos to join or be governed by this body, whether casinos prefer to be independent, and they want to protect their players' data.
Another question is, casinos that will not join this body will be preferred by gamblers who are excluded from other casinos. I don't think it's possible to have an agency for self-exclusion; it will just disrupt the casino's operation.
They should just leave it to gamblers and their families to handle their gambling issues; it's enough that they have warnings and self-exclusion features.

[Ojima-ojo]

Such as gambling exclusion guiding body will not be fruitful in the end because there are many ways in which gambler's will keep gambling unnoticed to whatever agency in charge.


Gambling withdrawal, or exclusions is a self triggered features that need to start from with in and as a gambler, to withdraw from gambling, third party helps is always limited compared to elf helps.

[Grace333]

So what you're saying is there should be people who would be dedicated to share self exclusion data to casinos about any gambler who wishes to self exclude themselves for certain period of time? That is a nice idea because of the merits from the self exclusion to protect gamblers but then self exclusion isn't something casinos ot sportsbook loves even though they pretend as though they're ok with it. So here comes my own question if this organization is set up and running, who's gonna pay them since casinos dont like self exclusion? The gambler? Or the government.

[Fiasem20]

Even if there is agency for self-exclusion such that once you self-exclude yourself from gambling it will automatically prompt other casino sites to exclude you, but it will take self discipline to be able to achieve that because i have seen a gambler who funded a friend's gambling account and used it to stake a bet after his own account was blocked by the casino. What am trying to say here is that a gambler should not gamble to an extent that they can't do without gambling even after taking measures to prevent them from gambling and incurring more losses.

Yes obviously it can happen,most gamblers can resist the desire of gambling even with the “self exclusion”method.Majorly most casino websites may exclude them from gambling till it gets to the time frame they’ve agreed on but they may still secretly gamble with their friends or relatives casino account.On that basis,the policy may help reduce irresponsible gambling behavior but not completely.When you’ve made up your mind to do a thing,make sure you stick to your words let your yes be yes likewise your no be no.Probably,those who have adopted this method of controlling their gambling lifestyle,I think they should find other activities more lively and fun that would eradicate gambling from their mind otherwise they may sneak and still gamble with other gamblers casino account.

[Findingnemo]

Already the KYC thing is a pain in the ass, and now if we want a centralized agency to oversee all the casinos so they can stop the stupids from spending their life savings?

First of all, it is not even possible because one who wants to gamble will always find a way, even if it is completely banned in their country.

Hypothetically, it happens when the one who are casual players will be affected, now their personal information will be shared and stored somewhere.

[coin-investor]

We don't have a governing body or association of online casinos worldwide; there are regional ones, but no worldwide one, so I doubt that it's possible to have that kind of agency or body.
There will be a conflict of interest, and some casinos will be uncooperative. It sounds good, but creating one won't be easy; let countries do it for their gamblers, and let gamblers be educated about what will harm them.

[Royal Cap]

But in reality I don't think it will work perfectly. Because not all casinos operate under the same rules. And even if an online IP is blocked or an account is closed, many people use VPNs or open accounts again with new information. So it is difficult to solve this problem with technology alone.  In fact the main problem is more related to the psychological addiction within people than technology or casinos. So I think no system will work perfectly if the person himself is not ready to change.

[Davidvictorson]

I'm just worried about the possible database that would handle this, and they would have the data of the people who would be prone to addiction or something. It's data privacy concerns again.
^{(This should be a voluntary thing)}

This is a brilliant idea. I do not know what they statistics say but I know that there are many players who have succeeded in self- exclusion, those who have failed at it because of one reason or another, and those who are still thinking about it. This “idea” will be very useful for those who struggle with it but just like you, I am concerned about their privacy and data leaks, and also how many casinos would like for a third party to take on this because I do believe that the self-exclusion feature is also marketing point for them.

[SatoPrincess]

But in reality I don't think it will work perfectly. Because not all casinos operate under the same rules. And even if an online IP is blocked or an account is closed, many people use VPNs or open accounts again with new information. So it is difficult to solve this problem with technology alone.  In fact the main problem is more related to the psychological addiction within people than technology or casinos. So I think no system will work perfectly if the person himself is not ready to change.

I agree and I will give an example. Some years ago, someone opened a scam accusation thread about a casino. It turned out that he had put a request to be banned from gambling on the casino a couple of months back because he realised he had a gambling problem, but relapsed after a while. And when his new account was flagged by the system, he created the scam accusation thread.

[salad daging]

Although this is a good idea, I don't think there will be any casinos willing to work with the organization to tackle problem gambling because this will hurt them, surely the casino will know how many thousands of users are addicted and continue to play at the casino itself, while the casino is the goal of making a profit with more and more people playing.

Self-exclusion still depends on the individual, because online casinos have also prepared this in each account, now it's up to them whether they want to do it themselves? Most people don't do that, they let the addiction continue to grow, while the casino doesn't know anything about this.

[Joy- maker]

Your ideas and thoughts about this topic are all welcome.

I also made a comment on that thread which i am going to repeat here, there are gambling companies that operate under the same group, therefore when you self-exclude yourself from one of these gambling companies that are operating under the same group the others will self-exclude you automatically as well, and there is something called National self-exclusion scheme, although this one only exist in some countries. National self-exclusion scheme block access to many licensed gambling sites at once.

[AmoreJaz]

Although this is a good idea, I don't think there will be any casinos willing to work with the organization to tackle problem gambling because this will hurt them, surely the casino will know how many thousands of users are addicted and continue to play at the casino itself, while the casino is the goal of making a profit with more and more people playing.

Self-exclusion still depends on the individual, because online casinos have also prepared this in each account, now it's up to them whether they want to do it themselves? Most people don't do that, they let the addiction continue to grow, while the casino doesn't know anything about this.

In short, the discipline should still come from the gambler himself. Even with self-exclusion he can always find a way how to open an account to another casino. So the effort is futile if you will traverse such route. So yeah, it depends on the gambler himself and not the casino's fault.

[Maslate]

Isn't there already agencies like this? Depending on the country that you are in. I know that in the UK, there are responsible gaming tools that block access to gambling sites.

I'm just worried about the possible database that would handle this, and they would have the data of the people who would be prone to addiction or something. It's data privacy concerns again.
^{(This should be a voluntary thing)}

That's more worrying on our part. Since they have our details, then it would be easy for them to hijack our own account and use it for their own advantage. The idea was actually good, its just that the side outcome might put us into a more dangerous scenario.

However, talking about self-exclusion, it should not be just a mere decision or action, but the willingness to pursue self-exclusion seriously by not accessing into other casinos should be build in the first place. Because its still a pointless decision if you still continue gambling once that self-exclusion period ends, its like you are just taking a break and continue with your gambling old style and habit.

[EluguHcman]

There have been lots of discussions with respect to self-exclusion and also complaints of players against casinos knowing that they have gambled above their limit, which should have prompted the casinos to restrict or exclude them from gambling due to them gambling way too high, which I see some sense in such conversation.

I think you are misinforming us on this so conversations.
In self exclusion gambling features, gamblers are not just automatically excluded by the casino, the player has to request for it and the commission will implement it either by banning user's account or probably places the players datas invalid from registering on other platforms even if they tend to bypass out of addiction.

It is all agreed that some after being self excluded by the casinos, they still find alternative to gamble and for breaking that breach is against the law for some of the gambling commissions in some region too.

Of  course some faces legal sanctions.

[Moreno233]

What you are suggesting is already in existence, it is part of what the regulatory body does. Self-exclusion was even created as a way of solving problem of gambling addiction so government takes that seriously in casinos where they have the power to do so. Even when government put more pressure on the casinos, it takes people actually coming out to report self-exclusion cases so that the government can investigate and take the right action.

[TypoTonic]

Isn't there already agencies like this? Depending on the country that you are in. I know that in the UK, there are responsible gaming tools that block access to gambling sites.

Right, it depends on the country's regulatory body. In the Philippines for example, instead of the casinos, you can apply for self or family exclusion directly through PAGCOR, which is our gambling industry regulator. They offer an exclusion period of 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years, but it does require you to submit KYC. Once your application gets approved, you'll be included in their National Database of Restricted Persons (NDRP).

I'm just worried about the possible database that would handle this, and they would have the data of the people who would be prone to addiction or something. It's data privacy concerns again.
^{(This should be a voluntary thing)}

That's another concern. Just September last year, PAGCOR was hit with a data breach, and the NDRP was leaked, which included 1,711 persons who self-excluded themselves from gambling.

[Odusko]

As for me, gambling is an interest in which individual or a body (organization) or agency can decide to withdraw at anytime of their choice. Casinos can create a limit for their clients if only the casino wants to control the gambling habit of the gamblers but on the side of the gambler (s) they can make a decisive action to exclude themselves from gambling at anytime of their choice. But if it is the casino that created the avenue for the exclusion, they will be a time frame for the body or the individual to return. But all depends on the casino policy of self-exclusion. Self-exclusion is a determination to leave the gambling world. Therefore the gambler will leave the casinos manually (he will not login to those which do not have self-exclusion button) and click on the  button on those which have the self-exclusion button. Whether bad or good, it is for the gambler to decide.

Self exclusions may be individual initiative but the casino will still be in charge t execute it sometimes casino shares the gambler on self exclusions information to other companies and competitors such as email and KYC information s that whenever th gambler want to create account on those casino it can be rejected and account blocked automatically but most times it doesn't work that way.

[alani123]

This already exists in most countries.

You can go to any country where there is licensed gambling and request a global self exclusion from all the sites the regulatory body overlooks.

But in reality this only works because of enforcing KYC.

There's no other way to enforce self exclusion. You can create new emails, new bitcoin addresses and get new IPs. There's no way a non KYC casino can keep you banned realistically.

[BRINIRHA]

The possibility of this can happen in some countries where gambling has become legal but for a body like this it will not be possible in my country because my country gambling is illegal and when creating this body even though it is voluntary because it sees that there are a lot of gambling addictions that exist now in my country but it seems to be difficult because it deals with regulations and of course the government that still views this as illegal.

But looking at some of the existing posts it seems that for countries where gambling is legal and can be played something like this can still happen and there are even some people who say that this body is formed in their country even though it is voluntary.