Topic: No KYC Crypto Casinos & Sites | NoToKYC.com | Exclusive Bonuses - page 14. (Read 4296 times)

I think it’s obvious what’s his reason. His website profitability depends on the user that doesn’t prerred KYC when playing in a casino somhe will surely stick to even if he mislead someone that casino doesn’t apply KYC since this is what his service offered.

In reality, Casino with Curacao license will always require KYC at any point of the user game. I believe the should start listing on Decentralized casino and forget Centralized Casino since there’s always a threat for license for them.

Lol. Agreed. It's pretty evident that op is basically ignoring most criticism since he has no proper response.

Stop acting innocent. You know damn well that any of these sites can enforce KYC whenever they want to using the TOS as their shield, but you aren't willing to admit that for reasons that only you are aware of.

What about to really update statistics on your website? Do you randomly read comments here? Am I wasting my time?
On your website we read: KYC level 0 - The site's Terms Of Service (ToS) do not mention any requirement for KYC verification. Now, double check your website.Justabit and Jackbit are entitled as KYC level 0 while both of them mention requirements for KYC verification. How is that? It's simple, right? You don't even check websites that you add in your list, why should someone use that? I shouldn't be the one to correct you.

I answered it many times now, the casinos have to include KYC TERMS if they have a license even if they will never do KYC! Not the government, the casinos is the one who has the decision of require KYC from a User. My KYC levels are dicussed with the casino teams!

The site seems like it was designed to funnel traffic to OP's referral links. The "No KYC" angle is great for advertising but as several people have pointed out these claims are a bit dubious. I would've preferred if they followed kycnot.me's approach where the main listing criteria isn't whether they can gain financially. It might still be a useful site but when there is a financial motive there is a possibility that the information we receive might be biased.

Respond to what? Is this an IA generated post? What did they respond to?
They didn't do anything aside from promoting one more of their links.. They didn't adreess any of the above concerns, which I conside shady as hell.
I re-read the Ann thread and saying that Curaçao licenses are credible is just.. Laughable, won't say more.

welcome to the forum, when I read the title of the thread I thought it was a new casino that was launched and that it would not have a Curacao license and because of not having a Curacao license consequently the casino would not ask for kyc, but from what I saw from the comments and When I entered your website I realized that it is a review site that is spreading disinformation, something very serious and wrong, all casinos that have a license in Curacao are obliged to do KYC eventually, this means that it would be wrong for you to talk about which casinos as:

1 - https://vavada.com/en (according to what I saw at this casino, they say they have a Curacao license, and will ask for kyc)


In other words, anyone who creates an account on Vavada must be prepared to do kyc, I hope that no one creates an account on Vavada because they saw this thread that is lying that Vavada doesn't have kyc

2 - https://flush.com ( according to what I saw at this casino, they say they have a Curacao license, and will ask for kyc )


they ask for kyc and it's even a much more problematic kyc compared to many other casinos, so it wouldn't be good for you to lie and claim that they don't ask for kyc while their TOS is very clear that they ask for kyc.

3 - https://bcgame.top

bc game has a curacao license, obviously because it has a license it is a kyc casino, as you can see in its TOS too:


If these casinos wanted to be a casino that doesn't ask for kyc and were accepting anonymous coins then it would be just because they didn't have a license, but then you need to ask yourself why they chose to have a license and ask for kyc? answer: because of government laws, if these casinos did not have a license they could be subject to government seizure and the owners of these casinos would be accused of money laundering and would be arrested and sentenced to many long years in prison. So here the situation is very clear, casinos must comply with the laws, they are protecting themselves by having a license. Don't spread misinformation

Maybe he is referring to the casinos shown on that page? I like the fact that they highlight KYC here. They know that this is the main thing that people are considering right now before they use the platform. I'm sure their site will get a lot of traffic because of it and it's going to be easy for them to get a referral this way.

For those who don't want a KYC, they can accept some things like if the casino has no license. They agree that this is one of the consequences for their own freedom but there are still legit non-license casinos out there, so they are going to be just fine. If a license casino shuts down, sometimes we still can't do anything and we still can't get paid so we shouldn't think that they are superior. Apart from the non-licensed one, I think a licensed casino can sometimes don't have a KYC or they don't mandate it, so some of us can also consider them sometimes.

Nice to see you responded to that, and i hard a run through the blog post earlier and i will still have a reread again later on to grasp enough understanding of what the term and condition are while using the coin to gamble most especially its advantage over other coins like Bitcoin.
Cause I am curious to know if there are special odds allocations for those who use the coin to stake their games, or is it the same as every other listed coin in the casinos that accept them?

Thank you for all your feedback guys  

We published a blog post about the best privacy coins . You can use them to gamble as we have some no kyc crypto casinos which also accept this coins to enhance your privacy.

I very much go with your opinion, kyc on different casino platforms are supposed to be of different levels or grade when it comes to difficulty, but then in the end, kyc is still kyc no matter how easy or hard it is to pass, it is still the same personal documents that the user will have to submit for the verification..

So yeah, I go with your opinion on the matter of kyc classification, and speaking about playing on the casinos to gain first hand experience, if op is not doing that or has not done that on the few casinos he has already reviewed, then I wonder what information he or she is sharing, the mandatory job of a reviewer is that you play on the site, test the deposit and withdrawals with different amount of money , see how quick or how much delay it takes before the casino process a withdrawal request, play some of the games as well, I know this is the reviewer risking his or her funds but no one should ever launch a review site if he or she is not ready to sacrifice both time and money to gain first hand experience.

I know it's not easy launching a casino review site You'll have to do extensive reviews and try the casino so you can explore the casino and come out with good reviews, but choosing a concept that is not popular with a limited number of casinos that you can include and promote is not good when it comes to profitability.

You even come out with your own terms of KYC, when we all know there is no such thing as KYC classification when we say NO it is no, it will just confuse your readers.

Why not put level 4 and level 5 so you can include all the casinos 

He still has it on his list and that is not good he should consider taking down a casino with questionable status even if the list is going too short, it's his responsibility to only present the best and most reputable casinos.

I find the list useless when you say no KYC then it says no KYC. There is no such thing as level 1 no-KYC casinos he just put a tag on these casinos, If a user is looking for a no-KYC casino I don't think he will trust this platform/

Well in view of all this I can say that the No KYC casinos that are currently there now may be that for some players things are different, there are minimum requirements and they are not so concerned about what happens, particularly the casino list What do you have here, I didn't know that they didn't have the No KYC requirement, generally I am a person who likes very reliable casinos, Betplay is one that I have seen there, I think it is good, now the casino that most It hurt me that it didn't have KYC, it was ekll from freebitco.in, because it is a casino that has had a lot of relevance in my life, it was the casino that I have seen all the time, I have played, I have lost, I have won, I have withdrawn, I have deposited with complete normality, never without problems, and besides that their game of twos is the most classic of all, and for that reason I think that things when they are without KYC work better and obviously they let people enter with the use of VPN, I don't know if these casinos comply with that standard, but I would really be a supporter that this is the best thing to do.

As for the casinos that are here, it may be that they do not have the use of KYC, but for how long? The truth is that now there are many problems regarding this, there are casinos that are guided only by doing things like not also accepting the VPN from other countries, and I don't see this as fair, a few years ago, the casinos had no reasons to not accept people with KYC or VPN, now things are so tight that although it is difficult to attract potential players, they do not allow them to have anonymity, privacy and they also prohibit countries, so these types of things are the that a casino should accept, not have any of that, in fact as I had said before, I didn't know that these casinos did not have the KYC requirement, so we could think that that is one way to do things well, and that a government matters ? If a ca casino business the government does not fall.

A new casino, exchange & exclusive bonus was added 

Are you serious? Why would he want to do that? His site is basically advertising no-KYC sites which is clearly debatable to a large extent. It's like a guide to help gamblers who wish to avoid KYC.

Also, his site isn't offering no-KYC facilities. Check the site properly before posting.

By the way, this is indeed a good marketing ploy.  Any normal person will always prefer to receive money without anyone knowing that he received it.  This could be winning in a casino or in any other case.  I would even correlate this desire with the freedom inherent in the human psyche.  By receiving money anonymously, you are not obliged to explain or relort anything to anyone, and this means that you are free from such unnecessary actions or even responsibilities.  Therefore, anonymity in payments is important.
 Also, many people do not want anyone to know that they are gambling in a casino.  And here KYC is, of course, a completely unnecessary procedure.  So, as it turns out, the absence of KYC is necessary for many people and this desire is naturally in high demand.  And this is good marketing.

Alright these types of information can really help someone who is in need of such a site. The OP could have been designed better, but still works from me. I can see that you have added all the necessary information required here. Moreover my only complaint is that the segregation is done by AI. I mean are we in such a stage that we have to rely on AIs suggestions? OP could have done this work manually, and it would have been attracted more customers to your site. Nevertheless wish you best of luck for your future.

Is there such a thing as KYC level 1 as defined by casinos? It is either they ask it or not, your platform description is misleading and deceptive and there's one questionable name in your NO KYC list.
For you to have a list you disregard the reputation of the casinos if you stick to straight NO KYC you'll only have 4.

Definitely, doubt the motive of the unlicensed casino if they started asking KYC from their clients.
Because only licensed casinos usually require their players to submit KYC verification because of the AML policy that they need to abide.
The site list offered by the OP may be good to some players who really don't want to submit their KYC.
However, the dilemma of getting screwed is always there because unlicensed casinos can really mess up with the player's funds if they want to.
Also from the OPs list, I have seen some like vavada which is requiring KYC from their clients before withdrawal, so don't know why it is on the list. He can check it on their terms here - https://vavada.com/en/terms-and-conditions, and verification of identity seems needed on this site.