Is player protection better than a total gambling ban?

[giammangiato]

The idea is not bad, unfortunately if we have to be realistic it does not have good results, an addicted player does not let himself be stopped by the limits imposed by one or more platforms, he simply changes platforms and continues to play compulsively without limits.
Guys, it's a phenomenon you can't treat delicately, you have to be firm, the ban is a good way to limit the damage.
I also support the adoption of strict rules, I see it as the most effective solution to date.

[Franklyn-wood]

This method shifts the responsibility from the gambler to the casino. In other words, it is not the individual who exercises self-control, but rather the casino. This approach may be effective, especially for individuals who are prone to gambling addiction. However, it is important to note that addicted gamblers may attempt to circumvent restrictions by gambling online in other jurisdictions. Therefore, implementing restrictions and controlling gamblers requires a centralized regulatory system that spans multiple jurisdictions. Otherwise, the effectiveness of the control measures may be limited.

The measures would be effective mostly for addicted gamblers who are in their early stages, it would be quite easy for the government measures to help regulate their gambling addiction and with time they will start to gamble responsibly or quit. But for addicts that are beyond the early stage of addiction mere restrictions wouldn't hold them back, they will just seek for alternatives routes to continue gambling. Effective cure for addiction starts with an addict admitting what he is and making a serious decision that he wants to stop so getting out of addiction lies mainly with the addicts rather than government regulations to avoid addiction.

Government intervention in creating a regulatory system to control gambling and addiction is good,  but all depends on individual the addicme ted to be willing to accept correct and follow rules available to help reduce or stop. Addiction can not be completely stopped only by government policies, but also with the interest of the addict concerned.
Like I heard that some countries frowns at gambling sites and the gamblers also, with such policies it will reduce the rate a little except for those who have gone too far in addiction.

[nara1892]

Many parties try various ways to reduce or prevent someone from getting addicted, that's good but actually in practice it's not that easy, especially when someone is already trapped in chronic addiction, they will always have a way to access gambling, maybe some platforms can implement a limit system like the one you described OP but every day there are thousands of new online casinos that appear and they can be accessed by everyone, addicted gamblers will not play on just one site, and on the other hand this plan can also reduce casino revenue, I'm not sure there will be many casinos willing to implement it because the most important thing is ABUNDANT PROFITS.

[xenomorfo]

I don't think this will work because a player's loss is a casino's profit, and they can't take action against themselves. I mean, I don't see any point in casinos introducing rules or restrictions that will ultimately reduce their profits. The regulator could certainly impose this, but it would be impossible to control everything, and each individual case would have to be interpreted individually. Therefore, I don't think it will work.

I don't think it will work either, because it clashes with the purely selfish and greedy human nature.
You can put all the limits and all the barriers in the world, but the avid player with an obvious addiction problem will always find a way to get around the rules and limits.
In fact, the problem must be treated upstream, not downstream.

[Betwrong]

This type of regulation will probably result in the improvement of the gambling industry, and I wish more countries would follow this instead of thinking about banning gambling, because gambling addiction has become rampant and already out of control.
~

You see, it's simply not true. I don't understand why people keep repeating it, especially those working for gambling sites. In most countries, about 0.5%–3% of adults have some sort of gambling disorder. Yes, it's a tragedy. Every life matters, and we have to try to do something about it. But why spread panic? "already out of control"? Where? What country are you talking about? The truth is, it's hard to find a country where more than 10% of people who gamble are problem gamblers. Do some research before posting, please.

[Jostern]

I don’t think having a limit implementation is the solution for what it is, and gambling can’t be banned entirely from whatever country that you’re having a mind to ban gambling, there are always going to be people who aren’t gambling responsibly either because they don’t know how to control themselves when it comes to gambling.

Personally if you ask me I don’t think there is any way or means that you’re going to be adding a limit of deposit that someone can make, just because you want to use that to stop high number of gamblers, individuals just have to try and work on themselves.

[Bitcoin.com97]

Just as you have said , addiction is rampered now ,it's only few that are not addicted gamblers, putting limit doesn't sound good enough, maybe temporary banning from site will go a long way, although I know those addicted gamblers always find a way to gamble, there are so many ways to control addicted gamblers, if rules are implemented and it's been obeyed ,the high rate of it will definitely stop.

[Outhue]

This type of regulation will probably result in the improvement of the gambling industry, and I wish more countries would follow this instead of thinking about banning gambling, because gambling addiction has become rampant and already out of control.

These are the exact words that I believe could be part of the solution:

https://sigma.world/news/jresponsible-gambling-betting-customer-experience/

“In this context, tools such as deposit limits, loss limits, temporary breaks and self-exclusion mechanisms have become part of the customer journey. When signs of vulnerability are identified, customer support can direct users to organisations specialising in psychological support and treatment for gambling addiction.

The director explained that the objective is to build a relationship based on trust and support, free of judgement, while providing resources to help players maintain control over their gambling activity. This approach follows a trend observed in more mature regulated markets, such as the United Kingdom and other European countries, where consumer protection policies are already part of the business strategy of major operators.”

Aside from the country mentioned in this article, what other countries do you know that are following this kind of approach?

Banning gambling can be the only solution for some countries, everyone have their rights to do what they like if it's for the sake of their people, for example in Muslim countries there is no way they won't put ban on gambling, even if there is less cases of addiction going on, it's the right thing to do because that's what their religion says, they must stand against gambling.

America is a Christian country but they still choose to allow gambling and I believe that's because they are making huge money from casinos especially those that are located in Las Vegas, so every country has their own rules and regulations about gambling.

[TopTort777]

How they are going to find who is addicted and who is not if addicted gamblers rarely confess they have problem and need help? Just how they are going to tell difference between addiction/passion/tactics if gambler is playing online? What, they are going to ask for access to bank account to tell if he is gambling with his last money and borrowed more? With their protection program they will find and reach 1 out 1000 addicted, because his actions would look suspicious.

[Ronsbit]

I don’t know any country in particular, but I thought player protection is supposed to be something the casino should adhere to and that should be something compulsory and not one country mandating it and other countries' players being treated less.

And I will always support strict rules being put in place that will help gamblers from getting addicted rather than banning it and preventing those who are supposed to be gambling freely from accessing it.

Maybe countries that implements such policies would definitely call casinos and bet houses that operates in their jurisdiction to also implement the policy to protect players interest when it comes to addiction. These measures they have listed would be adhered to by the casinos when called upon. At least this measures would save the government their taxes rather than a straight ban on casinos which generates revenue for them. So banning gambling is not the best option to do away with gambling as not every gambler is an addict

[Mr_Brilliant$]

Just as you have said , addiction is rampered now ,it's only few that are not addicted gamblers, putting limit doesn't sound good enough, maybe temporary banning from site will go a long way, although I know those addicted gamblers always find a way to gamble, there are so many ways to control addicted gamblers, if rules are implemented and it's been obeyed ,the high rate of it will definitely stop.

What you’re saying is true though, a temporary ban could help some people slow down and rethink things..  But the problem is, if someone is already deeply addicted, there is also a chance they will just create another account or move to a different gambling site..
That is why the bigger issue is helping people realize they have a problem in the first place.. Those rule and restrictions can reduce the damage, but they can’t completely stop addiction unless the person is also willing to stop it for him or herself..

[pawanjain]

Not sure about countries but there are gambling sites with self exclusion program already.
We don't know yet if such a feature is actually being used at a large scale or not.
We also don't know whether such a feature is highly effective in treating gambling addiction or not.
But it sure does sound good to have player protection activities which will help gamblers to decrease their hunger for gambling.

[Accardo]

What you’re saying is true though, a temporary ban could help some people slow down and rethink things..  But the problem is, if someone is already deeply addicted, there is also a chance they will just create another account or move to a different gambling site..
That is why the bigger issue is helping people realize they have a problem in the first place.. Those rule and restrictions can reduce the damage, but they can’t completely stop addiction unless the person is also willing to stop it for him or herself..

Unfortunately, players do not get well from restrictive measures, they get better through cognitive repairs, and societal care, enough love and kindness never gets to problem players, also banning accounts here and there won't dismantle the cognitive errors stationed on the fractured mind of an addict. What works is setting up a society or building an environment where problem players are cared after with subtle information on building a much better strategy, other than theirs that is set out to beat a mathematically designed system curated to make players lose.

[cryptoaddictchie]

This type of regulation will probably result in the improvement of the gambling industry, and I wish more countries would follow this instead of thinking about banning gambling, because gambling addiction has become rampant and already out of control.

Actually thats make more regulated and comprehensive for users. If I were to ask if I will support this approach this more make sense for me as that will limit some gamblers potential addiction and limit their losses.

Banning gambling is inevitable for strict countries but if they look into this kimd of set up surely they will see that having a strict limit of everything such as deposit and even losses will be controlled.

[_act_]

“In this context, tools such as deposit limits, loss limits, temporary breaks and self-exclusion mechanisms have become part of the customer journey. When signs of vulnerability are identified, customer support can direct users to organisations specialising in psychological support and treatment for gambling addiction.

It is easier to say than to be done. Which gambling sites will know that its customers are addicted to gambling? No gambling site wants to know their customers net worth which is a reason they can not know if he is addicted. Because a customer is losing $1000 while gambling every week, that do not mean the person is not able to afford to lose the money. Also just know that the gambling site will not do anything but be happy that the person is losing the money.

[Fortify]

This type of regulation will probably result in the improvement of the gambling industry, and I wish more countries would follow this instead of thinking about banning gambling, because gambling addiction has become rampant and already out of control.

These are the exact words that I believe could be part of the solution:

https://sigma.world/news/jresponsible-gambling-betting-customer-experience/

“In this context, tools such as deposit limits, loss limits, temporary breaks and self-exclusion mechanisms have become part of the customer journey. When signs of vulnerability are identified, customer support can direct users to organisations specialising in psychological support and treatment for gambling addiction.

The director explained that the objective is to build a relationship based on trust and support, free of judgement, while providing resources to help players maintain control over their gambling activity. This approach follows a trend observed in more mature regulated markets, such as the United Kingdom and other European countries, where consumer protection policies are already part of the business strategy of major operators.”

Aside from the country mentioned in this article, what other countries do you know that are following this kind of approach?

The countries that ban things instead of looking at alternative methods like this usually have some other ideology driving it - either authoritarians or religious based. Authoritarians are prone to making snap decisions, usually as a distraction to something else happening at the time and wanting to look like they are "doing something" that could be the cause of problems in society, rather than admitting that this type of government is prone to failure. It has similarities with religious driven bans, which are driven by texts written thousands of years ago which have no real bearing on all the discoveries and developments of humanity made since then. Neither of these two like "soft" approaches such as self regulation or giving their citizens freedom of choice, so it is akin to their whole existence. The less of these two types of government, the better everyone will be.

[Akbarkoe]

Addiction is indeed a major problem in this industry, where more people cannot control themselves and lose all their property because of gambling addiction, related to player protection it will be interesting for my observation, seeing that the vision of the program is clear to control the development of addiction with such regulation, and can treat addicted people as this program is intended for consumer protection.

But the big question for countries that run such regulations, how effective they are or not and how much impact can be given to players, because if successful this will be an important note for those who want to legalize gambling.

[Porfirii]

Instead of banning gambling the way they are doing in some countries (to the extent of punishing with a prison sentence not only the owners of the gambling platforms but also the users) I think that this is the correct approach. It is about protecting the users, not punishing them. It is incredible how different the way citizens are treated in different legal systems can be.

I join those who would support this initiative for the well-being of users. When gambling stops producing pleasure and begins to generate pain, it also stops being a game.

[libert19]

Blanket bans just take things underground, and governing body will have to constantly run after 'em to expose 'em while with player protection, gamblers won't feel need to go underground to satiate their urges, so IMO, player protection is indeed better than blanket bans. It keeps things relatively simple.

This type of regulation will probably result in the improvement of the gambling industry, and I wish more countries would follow this instead of thinking about banning gambling, because gambling addiction has become rampant and already out of control.

A complete ban on the gambling industry benefits no one: the regulator doesn't receive taxes, the owner doesn't make a profit, citizens don't get jobs, gamblers don't get their game. And healthcare workers don't get their patients.

Last one got me rolling for 3 seconds.

[CryptoYar]

This approach is likely to be best developed in UK. In recent years Gambling Commission has been tightening up rules, such as affordability checks, bet limits, forced self blocking tools, and more. It is not perfect, but it is has more user focused system than most. However, some big steps have been made in Australia, including ban on online gambling ads and limited playing in some states for electronic gaming machines. Smart way to do this, Netherlands. They re opened their controlled market for online gambling in 2021 with responsible gambling as part of the base.

​In recent years, both Sweden and Germany have been strengthening their systems and adding both limits on deposits, and cooling off periods, now is a usual practice, not rare one. In markets which are very well known, trend is towards rules, instead of banning. So mostly, bans dont do anything and they can only drive activity hidden, where there is no user protection at all.