Polymarket has self exclusion

[Doan9269]

Unfortunately, prediction markets are emulating what they claim not to be; we also don't want them to come across as gambling, because it is more about taking risks than gambling.

I think some of these features are just part of their selling points to ensure that more people are inclined towards seeing them as considerate and responsible as well for their use. I don't know what fun it is in prediction markets compared to the risk one has to take on what is known to be uncertainty, and the entire process can be manipulated by an insider, so self-exclusion is just, by the way, prediction markets remain what they are.

[STT]

Everything can be gambling and compulsive behavior if you frame it that way in your head.  I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they dont even need or already have duplicates of.
  Just having that option isnt any kind of negative, in theory it should be an option everywhere as its not too much ask for as an option.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

Everything can be gambling and compulsive behavior if you frame it that way in your head.  I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they dont even need or already have duplicates of.
  Just having that option isnt any kind of negative, in theory it should be an option everywhere as its not too much ask for as an option.

Yeah, i totally agree with you, but for me, i think there is a difference between having a hobby and dealing with an actual problem due to compulsive behaviors. And when it comes to gambling, having a self exclusion is very important due to the fact how the individuals stands the riskof financial harm. which is not the same with shopping websites. Because when an individual buys too many items he isn't in need of, the possibility of him selling it back is very high, and he will recover his money back, unlike gambling whereby if you lose, it has lost forever, and can't be resold or exchange for another item. So thats the huge difference between gambling. 

[M47AK16]

There's this news about Polymarket already acting more like gambling sites as they have announced Deposit Limits and Self-Exclusion... so I thought they were a prediction market, why are they now introducing the same protections we normally see on gambling platforms? self-exclusion is mainly there to help minimize gambling addiction, yet it is now being implemented here as well.

now, this is where regulators should look at it more closely, because if a prediction market sees the need to introduce responsible gambling tools then they should see them like gambling sites. no more prediction market industry, they should join the gambling industry.

I don't know if it's more a consequence of warnings or guidelines from the regulator, as eisen33 points out. But what's clear is that we all know those prediction markets are gambling. A new, different, unique kind of gambling, if you will, but gambling nonetheless. So far, they've managed to circumvent gambling regulations by exploiting legal loopholes, but I think that will gradually change, country by country.

Exactly what I was thinking about this. We know that even prediction markets are a sort of gambling because you are basically just making a bet that can be correct or wrong and you will either win some money or lose your money, which is exactly how gambling works, but since it's not straight up gambling, because there is a thin line there, just like how options and binary trading is basically gambling but just given the name of trading, because essentially, you are just making predictions about the future and betting with your money on it, and that's gambling, but options and binary trading is also not considered gambling.

Polymarket or any other platform that will start providing their users with tools and limits that are generally given to gamblers are just indirectly connecting themselves with the gambling industry and are giving regulators the opportunity to impose the same rules on them that they do on casino platforms. They should have thought about this before, because just like I mentioned, even though binary trading is also sort of gambling, but they don't give options such as self-exclusion to their users, because they don't consider it gambling, they think you can make money from it in the long run if you follow strategies, but it's a lie, however, they know there is a thin line that they don't need to cross.

[o48o]

Everything can be gambling and compulsive behavior if you frame it that way in your head.  I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they dont even need or already have duplicates of.
  Just having that option isnt any kind of negative, in theory it should be an option everywhere as its not too much ask for as an option.

Just like mobile games with in-app purchaces, gaming platforms, adult media sites and fast food places and deliveries. You know, things that can be bad for addicts in general. But they aren't doing it unless they aren't going to do it unless they are forced by law, like casinos.

In fact, shareholders might even sue the company if companies were offering such a service out of pure kindness, as it could be argued that they wouldn't be fulfilling their duties to promote the success of that company. And helping customers to quit isn't really a profitable business model when your competition isn't doing that.

[Rashlyowl]

Everything can be gambling and compulsive behavior if you frame it that way in your head. I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they dont even need or already have duplicates of.
Just having that option isnt any kind of negative, in theory it should be an option everywhere as its not too much ask for as an option.

Love your description of self-exclusion bros @STT, any form of consumerist behavior can lead to compulsive habits & we should not view the self-exclusion option negatively. From the users or consumers side, it is actually a good thing when they are offered options that help them.

Back to Polymarket implementing self-exclusion, given the numerous risks associated with their site, they felt it was necessary to have that self-exclusion option.

[Hispo]

Everything can be gambling and compulsive behavior if you frame it that way in your head.  I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they dont even need or already have duplicates of.
  Just having that option isnt any kind of negative, in theory it should be an option everywhere as its not too much ask for as an option.

Well, honestly, I don't think it is fair to compare shopping sites like Amazon, eBay or even Mercado Libre with some sites like Kalshi or Polymarket. First off, Polymarket and Kalshi have mechanisms which are very alike to gambling and even trading. Trading in a sort of way that people need to take decisions in a very short period of time in order to get money or lose it all. On the other hand, when you go to a shopping website like Amazon, you can buy and you can cancel orders and you can manage your money in a very easier way and you are not pushed to take risky behaviors in order to get what you want. And in the end, it is a matter of perspective and opinion, but I am sure that there are more people who are addicted to prediction markets than people who are addicted to shopping on Amazon.

[Maslate]

Back to Polymarket implementing self-exclusion, given the numerous risks associated with their site, they felt it was necessary to have that self-exclusion option.

No, if there was no regulatory pressure on them they would not think of that. 
With self exclusion being implemented, its effect on their finances is negative, i mean people are supposed to gamble without self exclusion, once a person applies for it and gets approved that money going to them will no longer happen, So they sacrifice something here. probably just to please the regulators.

I said this because what I mean is they are not required, because if they were then Kalshi would also do the same.

[Royal Cap]

I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they don't even need or already have duplicates of.

No, I would say that shopping addiction and gambling addiction are not really the same thing. In shopping a person usually buys within his budget.  If he spends too much, he may end up buying unnecessary things. But gambling is a completely different matter. Here the addicted person, after exhausting his savings continues to gamble even by taking loans or borrowing money, which puts him at extreme financial risk.

Because when an individual buys too many items he isn't in need of, the possibility of him selling it back is very high, and he will recover his money back, unlike gambling whereby if you lose, it has lost forever, and can't be resold or exchange for another item.

I would like to add another point to this. Gambling sites are designed to target the psychology of people in such a way that they become more desperate to 'recover their losses' after losing. But in shopping, this kind of pressure or dopamine rush to recover does not work. Therefore the self exclusion feature on gambling platforms should not be just an additional benefit, but should be made mandatory for the safety of users. But I doubt how many players use that features.

[angrybirdy]

Everything can be gambling and compulsive behavior if you frame it that way in your head.  I'm sure some shopping websites should have self exclusion on them because some people are seriously addicted to shopping for items they dont even need or already have duplicates of.
  Just having that option isnt any kind of negative, in theory it should be an option everywhere as its not too much ask for as an option.

Yeah, i totally agree with you, but for me, i think there is a difference between having a hobby and dealing with an actual problem due to compulsive behaviors. And when it comes to gambling, having a self exclusion is very important due to the fact how the individuals stands the riskof financial harm. which is not the same with shopping websites. Because when an individual buys too many items he isn't in need of, the possibility of him selling it back is very high, and he will recover his money back, unlike gambling whereby if you lose, it has lost forever, and can't be resold or exchange for another item. So thats the huge difference between gambling. 

I understand your point of view. I believe that the key is that a hobby isn't a problem in itself, but when it becomes an addiction and begins to impact the individual's finances or normal life. Gambling can also be dangerous because they can lose the money and nothing is of value to them in return which they can get back or sell. Which is why tools such as self-exclusion are very useful to people who feel they are losing control. Shopping can also be unhealthy, but its effects are very different as well as the manner in which they occur.

[ZeroVinsonN]

It also gives them an excuse, you can't blame them if you get addicted or spend too much money using their services when they've already included a way for you to control how much money and time you spend, at the very least they are taking this step in the right direction and they are doing it early, prediction markets aren't as popular as casinos are, with Poly Market starting it we are bound to see other prediction markets going in that direction as well, it will present them to the world as responsible and show that care for their users, (that's at least what they want us to think).

Yes, but this can only help those that are from United States. Anyone that is not from United States can open another account, deposit money from another wallet and use different IP to access the prediction market. Even who knows if the person did not use different wallet address and different IP addresses, that Polymarket will bother knowing if the person gone for self-exclusion before.

I don't use poly market so I haven't really bothered to check but I'm assuming they have mandatory KYC because if they don't then common sense will be enough for them to know that self exclusion won't work when people can just open now accounts. If they have KYC though then it becomes easy to enforce the self exclusion, it doesn't matter if you are in a different country because you face and ID will still be the same and the moment you try to verify your identity the system will flag you as someone who already has an account and as someone on self exclusion, this way people can't cut around it.

[Taricoins]

I agree with alot of views on this post, as long as you put concurrent sum of money into prediction markets, I think it's gambling. Although theoretically, it's not the same thing as they have alot of distinction but the effect still remains the same hence the implementation of self exclusion.

I fond prediction markets like Polymarket to be way more addictive because of the array of options given to customers