For example, a top site like Stake has been harassing a particular gambler using KYC as a shield. This is just one of the reasons as to why KYC is usually frowned upon.
KYC is a double-edged sword if you think about it.
It is that simple. You said it yourself.
"has been harassing a particular gambler using KYC as a shield" That's a reputational issue of bad business practice. Any site that doesn't state it the Terms could also use it as a shield.
I was pointing out the legal obligations anyone providing a service is under. Omitting putting that in the Terms doesn't remove it.
It's sad that bad businesses unfairly not paying out makes you guys think that anyone honestly stating their obligations in their Terms will do the same.
You can only grow so big, before the regulators sit up and take notice... and I think you guys peaked their interest. There is nothing wrong with going "legit" ... I am just saying, a lot of people are not going to be happy.
This is similar to what happened with "Circle" back in the day... they started with Bitcoin, then they turned into a Bank and they ditched their Bitcoin clients.
No. You come on. That's complete and utter nonsense that I've already told you is untrue.
We've always been a law-abiding site. We just clarified a few things in the ToS.
If you think otherwise you are wrong.