Topic: How to self exclude from anonymous gambling sites - page 8. (Read 6797 times)

Sometimes it is not about psychologist that needed but the addicted gambler itself realizing what
he is doing and what could bring them because if that happened then the family itself is morethan
enough to help them leaving addiction but the problem is WILL THEY CAN accept that?

It's a fact, things are like that , I Personally have always seen that things to generate more money have to be put in context for this type of things in casinos, all casinos always want to have people there spending, some don't like them. It doesn't matter if they are Addicts, what matters to them is that, putting in money and continuing to play and Continuing to lose, but there are casinos that currently have another type of approach to things, or they try to protect themselves with these types of things like self-exclusion and that is something that even if it is pure advertising, because if it helps to reduce it in any way, it is already a fact that advertising has to be Focused on Non-Addiction and that is why I Think all this self-exclusion Arises.

The main issue for most people is that they do point out their fingers on someone whom they would really be able to see upon on the time that they are on losing condition. Seeking for exclusions features or whatsoever without even trying to look at on themselves about being addicted or making those shit decisions towards their gambling activity. Self exclusions kind of feature isnt something that you could be able to see on a gambling site. If you are really that tending to completely stop in gambling then you wont really be needing any of those things but rather completely stop on you own.
This is really just that an option if ever its available but majority of these platforms doesnt have that kind of offering or feature because they do always love on having those addicted gamblers
because this is where they could make easy money or revenue.

Absolutely mate mind control is one of the best thing in gambling cause if we don't have it we become addicted. And we are all know what are the possible outcome of being addicted. How hard it is, cause being an addict is not easy it's hard to control themselves in betting cause they are betting and bet if they have money. And even don't have money  still the addict will make a way to have in order to bet and one if the best example is stealing some things in thier home and sell it then go to the casino.

What we are really looking for is that things improve and can be done so that they can be cured, the drinks that are given in the casinos are very nice but they are not intended to cure, to cure a person with addiction they must have other types of treatments I have said that when you want to be cured, you have to take treatments with psychologists and psychiatrists, and you have to take advantage of it in every way to cure yourself. Some experiences never end , which is why self-exclusion , which for me is worthy of Respect, That's why you always have to take advantage of opportunities.

Hahaha...I think you are making a whole lot of mistakes here bro, this style can never work, it may restrict those who are not truly addicted, but for those who are surely addicted, it takes far more than a restrictive means to cure them. Addiction is a plague and it rather needs cure than restriction, but unfortunately, the option suggested here can only restrict, it can't cure. Now imagine, you want to stop a weed from growing in your backyard but instead of removing it from the root, you are cutting it, do you think it can last? Never, it will grow back, it's only a matter of time. This is how I see it, and when the 21 days lapses and the gambers is pressing and yearning for gambling again with a higher desire, what will he do?

Even at the time the gambler keeps the money through this style, do you think any other availabe money will still not be used for gambling? This is why I see this style as a mere way of investing, nothing more and there are also alternatives to it where one will keep the money for a while by indirectly locking it somewhere to yield for them, so it is nothing near a solution to addiction for any reason whatsoever. And since addiction is psychological, I strongly advise anyone seeking healing from to go psychological. And if the self-help is not working, such a person should speak out and seek external or professional help.

Very well said bud, it's absolutely inhumanity to fellow man if any casino decide to be making profit out of a players addiction to gambling, this is something that is highly discouraged, and a good reason why all available reputable casinos take the issue of responsible gambling very seriously.
From what I've seen, I would actually say that majorly all registered and licensed casinos have it as a matter of importance, the self exclusion feature, which is what users uses to ban themselve from the casino when they notice they can't go a day without visiting the casino and spending money on bets, most times, money they never intended betting with.

But personally, I am still of the opinion that the self exclusion feature is still little to no relevance when it comes to responsible gambling, this is due to the fact that for some casino, it's still possible for a gambler to come back and register on the casino again after having self excluded him or her self.

As far as I know, casinos are businesses engaged in gambling or betting where many people bet there for two possibilities at the end of the session, namely winning or losing, and the purpose of all businesses is to make a profit, so I don't believe that casinos will really close someone's account when they detect that there are signs of addiction from the gambler by seeing the number of deposits that are more frequent than other gamblers.

For me and what I believe is that as gamblers get more addicted, casinos will be happier because they will get more profit when gamblers lose control and deposit more money. And another piece of evidence is that I think we've seen so many gamblers who end up going bankrupt and losing everything they own that if casinos really locked the accounts of every gambler who was detected to have signs of addiction, then obviously the bankruptcy would never have happened.

I'm not sure if 21 days are enough if you have an addiction though. Some reports suggest that any addiction affects the brain to a similar degree, although there is a clear difference between gambling addicts and other forms of addiction[1]. Not to mention any gambling-like mechanism like gacha game can stimulate our brain just like when we gamble with money in a casino. That being said, we need some time to cool off from any addictive behavior and spend more time on physical activity or social activity to enhance our prefrontal cortex connection so we won't get impulsive to seek dopamine as soon as possible[2]. CMIIW.

[1] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2023/07/how-gambling-affects-the-brain
[2] https://www.gatewayfoundation.org/addiction-blog/how-gambling-affects-brain/

But there are lot of things can happen in that 21 days period mate , yeah you might be right about the problem is just delaying but sometimes we only need some time to recover or understand what lies in our gambling addiction , in21 days we may remember what kind of person we are and what will be the best move to change it back now , because addiction in gambling is just about mind thinking not like in other vices like drugs,smoke,and liquor that it is our internal that seek for this , but in gambling mind control is what we only need .

For me and according to a healthy mindset that I think is quite reasonable to put forward that casinos are businesses engaged in gambling, the name of the business must be the main thing that is prioritized is profit, and the question is where do they get these profits? I think it is clear that all casinos get these profits from gamblers who lose and the fact is that now more and more casinos are popping up which means this business is really profitable. This means that I don't believe that casinos will close or lock the accounts of gamblers because it is detected that the accounts always deposit money even if they lose, because that's what casinos want which is when a gambler is more aggressive in gambling then that's when casinos will make more and more profits. And I only believe that casinos will close your account if they detect that you are doing suspicious things or violating the rules applied.

I believe it is ethical but only if the gambler has accepted those terms in before and he is aware his account may be closed if he shows signs of addiction of if he gives some approval for his account to be terminated. Others may suggest that closing the account and giving the gambler the money he has left in the account is even more ethical, but that is very rare to happen, considering casinos benefit from the gambling volume.
You know, the owners of casinos or those in charge of their economical profitability have realized that even if they decided to exclude those gamblers who are obviously going through addiction problems, those gamblers will continue to indulge in their addiction anyways on other platforms. In the end, the level of addiction is so strong that they will not care to keep going in other shady and small casinos.

What it is wrong and right kind of depends on the personal view we have about where our personal responsibility ends and where the responsibility of the casino begins.

If casino has such practice means that the casino is losing their profit, I doubt there is a casino with such practice, let me know if there is casino that do such practice.
The most possible thing to happen in this gambling industry is that the casino will warn the players only with email/pop up notification, at least based on my own experience in several different casinos.
Also remember about the warning in almost all casino "gamble responsibly", it means that everything we do in the casino is our own responsibility.
Lets say I have the chance to have a casino, I will not close my player's account because I think that my player is addicted but I'll just warn him and let him decide what to do.

Why would you consider it unethical when it's actually the right thing to do?
When a casino notices that one of their users is showing signs of addiction then the right thing to do is to lock his account immediately to stop him from losing more money.
I'm a bit lost here! Some say if they do it then it's unethical while the others say if they don't do it then they are greedy!

Well, In some countries or jurisdictions, I don't know about online gambling casinos, but exchanges, and I mean crypto exchanges are actually directed or required under the law, to report every that is above $10,000 to the government, and also, if they suspect any thing wrong with the deposit or where the money (the address) is coming from, they are also at the liberty of freezing the account the money was deposited into, until the users answers some questions, or the exchange in conjunction with the regulators, are able to confirm the legitimacy of the funds, and are sure it's not being used to commit or facilitate any crime related offenses like laundering and other vices.

Like I said before, I don't know if such laws/instructions are also passed to casinos as well, I've never heard of any, but about crypto exchanges, this law is present in some countries and or jurisdictions.

The casino will know if thier customers is already addicted or not. And one of the best example of that is when thier customers always depositing money from time to time and also always playing even though  they are to unlucky. The casino can monitor the bankroll of every players they have so once they got an information that account is too greedy and always depositing then that's a good customer that can make the casino richer. And yes you are right that mate the casino didn't lock  the account of a gambler once. It will always deposit unless that account break the rules. Cause we all know that every casino has a rules and regulations.

You have many things said over there to the point that I began to get confused on which one to reply to as they seem not necessarily related. Notwithstanding, the way gambling is being related to and engaged with is not the same as trading and investment, and if you are sincere, how many traders/investors have you seen so addicted to them to the point that it becomes a serious issue that calls for either internal or external help to get them cured? That is why we should not relate them together and the more reason why brokers, exchanges etc are less concerned about this, and even the government. If a trader and investors are losing so much, they always caution themselves and it is so easy. This is unlike gambling which is tempting and addictive on its own.

As for the KYC completion, I do not think that any standard and well-regulated brokers and exchanges are so relaxed to the point that they will allow you to be trading for so long without completing them, No. If it were to be with exchanges of before, fine, you might cite some examples, but when it comes to standard, reputation and regulation, you will hardly see one today. It got more strict with the brokers, you will never be able to withdraw a dime from your account without completing your KYC, that's how stringent it is.

Lastly, the policing remark is not just appropriate in my opinion as the government and good casinos are only finding ways to help the addicts one way or the other. And to always encourage a sane society, I do not think it's too much if such is considered for special cases.

With everything ongoing regarding gamblers experience from using a crypto casino, we have to set a target to what we wanted and how we engage from the way we are gambling, this is for the benefit and purpose of achieving our personal satisfaction, even though we are not much focused on other things which may serve as challenge at the course, each gambler will only want to be satisfied by being anonymous from the way he has chosen to experience his gambling lifestyle without considering others.

It wouldnt be called as an abuse since you haven't been forced on playing gambling into their platform on which means that you've been playing by you own will. Therefore, they would really be that safe
when it comes to that and it would rally be that laughable that you would really be trying out to blame them just because you have lost too much. 

Just like been said that they would really be letting people do play as much as they could and as much as they want and as long they do have the money that they could spend then its their full rights
on when they would be stopping which is usually it is on the moment that they would losing it all.

Exclusions arent that available all the time and just like on what most people been saying on here that this isnt a feature that they would be focusing on having into.
If there's one then it would be some sort of formality or trying to make themselves look that they do really care for you.

For me that is an abuse and a total lack of respect on the part of the casino towards the customers, because basically if I create my account in a casino and verify it, that account must be respected, I don't say anything if they create an account and it is not verified And time passes and nothing, maybe I accept it, but if they create the account they verify it and if they don't make the deposit then they close it? That's something that's not within the normal parameters for me, or I know if TOS makes those rules, because if it does there's nothing to do, but if they don't say them then those things shouldn't be allowed to do anything at all, Well, That is the same as having an account with money and not being active in 1 year and when they say that the account was deleted, they are very unpleasant things.