Topic: Should Online Casino Websites Require Risk Warnings, and Knowledge Assessment? - page 3. (Read 474 times)

I'm not against the knowledge assessment, quiz and whatnot, but this doesn't make any difference. Since those warnings could possibly anticipate a two-way reply from the user, who's gonna be so daft to click on "disagree" or whatever the next option might be? This would definitely be more of a formality than a regulation as it doesn't necessarily restrict anyone.[/list]

"What's good for the goose, they say is good for the gander" You don't put up obnoxious policies where you're probably getting a cut; the little sumptuous pieces of icings and cakes do not interfere regardless.
Of what purpose will it be anyway? You can't tell a sane person to not haul himself into a pit that's obviously seen. If they insist, you can't stop them as they may leave, but decide to come back when there's nothing to stop them.

100%. Rather than slapping that wordy ass TOS of theirs in my face which I would never read, would probably be a lot better to include some OBVIOUS warnings that despite being obvious, still escapes some gamblers for some reason lol. Ofc, still include the TOS, but add the big warnings as well. And maybe warnings on certain spending points every session. Pain in the ass, yes but at least it serves as a general warning.

As for the knowledge assessment quiz, I highly doubt it'd be effective. Gamblers would just press random stuff to proceed. And if it was required for them to know that stuff, kind of serves as a way for users to just leave the casino for doing that. So nothing too difficult, but pretty obvious as well in terms of setting up warnings.

I don't think it would work, because people willing to gamble aren't interested in answering to virtual quizzes, neither to agree and disagree terms. The KYC process itself is already painful enough to go through, now imagine having to answer a dozen of questions before being able to bet. Casinos introducing this kind of terms would be in disadvantage compared to other casinos, because gamblers would immediately reject playing at such bureaucratic casinos.

People are looking for accessibility and easiness nowadays. Anything taking longer than 5 minutes to sign up is already discarted by internet users. Businesses know about it, so they try to demand less informations as possible during the sign up procedure.

It’s not uncommon for casinos and sportsbook to warn there customers or patronizers on having to gamble responsibly. I find it to be of utmost necessity but, the warnings don’t come with enough severity for gamblers to take heed of it. Gamblers would probably ignore it 99% of the time but, at least the casino or sportsbook played a part and that’s the most important part to it.
Gambling is risky when not done respectfully or not properly managed. It could build you and could also reck you. It all depends on how you approach it.

Worth he rate of addiction in gambling and teenage exposure to gambling I think this will actually be necessary so that it may help to keep in check so of the untamed habits as also helps with monitoring especially the deceleration of risk gamblers who will have some restrictions around 10% , actually ro be more stringent, ur will e even better accounts be monitored a d when it feels like a users pattern of gambling on that particular account suggest addiction, a form of restrict for a while could be placed on such accounts and be synchronized across all casinos in that region to help restrict a d control or keep that gambler in check so that such gambler doesn't further promote the perception that gambling is the problem to the society meanwhile they are the problem for not keeping their habits under check.

Same as trading there is nothing wrong in a disclaimer warning or even guide because to me we see this mostly by exchanges or even gambling platforms where they even go to the extent of providing something like a demo account for those new to the platforms and even place some restrictions on them on the maximum level of leverage they can go on with but seriously even at this those who are perpetual gamblers or those who don’t want to learn about their excessive gambling would still have a work around, so it is not bad actually having this warnings but any addicted should rather seek gambling because this disclaimers will just be like a tutorial for them

Well, there's nothing wrong if they require risk warnings but as far as I know the gamblers who use those platforms already know that gambling is risky and one can lose a lot of money by doing it. If still after knowing all those things, they gamble then surely they'll answer all those questions and still gamble without caring much about those risk warnings.

That could help for those who don't know the risk associated with gambling and just want to jump into it from the advert they see about it online; such risk assessment might discourage most of them from ever going into gambling with a high amount. 
 
But for the old and already existing gamblers, they are already aware of this and have been skipping the rules, so even if such is displayed each time they want to place a bet or each time they visit the casino, they will skip it and do what they have in mind as usual.

Implementing stricter regulations, similar to those suggested for cryptocurrency trading, could indeed be a significant step towards protecting players at online casinos. Requiring players to acknowledge risk warnings, manage their funds responsibly and demonstrate an understanding of the risks involved is crucial to a safer gaming experience, but I have my doubts as to whether this would actually work and the challenges involved.

The fact is that implementing these regulations could be challenging, especially in a global and diverse industry like online gambling. Online casinos would have to collaborate and potentially face additional costs to develop and implement such systems… but with the rapid advancement of technology and the increasing emphasis on social responsibility, pressure from governments and the growing problem of addicted gamblers, perhaps these measures could become feasible and beneficial.

I'm sorry but shouldn't this a common sense? I mean, if you are an adult and are going to gamble you should already know that you could lose all your money if you gamble. also, casinos usually have a "responsible gambling" article in their casino that tells you what you need to do to become a responsible gambler.

I don't agree with this, I mean, it's a restrictive and hassle and I am not sure if this will be adopted worldwide but I remember Australia has a similar rule, their gambling regulation there is quite strict.

or better yet, they should require a "gambler license" before people can gamble. people need to take these tests and if they pass they get a "gambling license ID" and they only need to show it in order to be able to gamble 

Are the same casinos not the ones to set this, when they know that they have to encourage for more gambling from their users, i don't think they can provide them with anything that could serve a reminder to having a second thought on any gambling decision, instead, we should be the ones to apply that on our own.

Even if the gambling platforms should offer on this, people will still gamble the way they want because they already know that they are gambling under a single risk for winning or losing and they have no right to query the platform for why they lose a bet or for them to make a refund to them.

It might sound as if it will have any impact on the way gamblers play in a casino but in actual terms it won’t affect it. 

Now let’s take that of exchanges you mentioned, I have seen it in different exchanges before and in cases when I just registered an account and probably searching for something in an exchange the moment that little quiz comes up and they want to start testing if I know at least a bit about trading I tend to just skip it or quickly answer it without actually adhering to what the quiz was all about.

And the same can be said for gamblers - if they make it mandatory then gamblers will just click through (since it’s a one time thing) and then continue their gambling on the site - the only one in that list that would make a difference is that 10% of total assets but I’m sure casinos won’t want to make that mandatory since it will cost them money when gamblers aren’t using juggle money to gamble.

This initiative is hard to implement as most gamblers won't comply or is not amenable to this kind of activity. Maybe, they can do this as an optional feature. For those who are willing to undergo this activity, they can. But for those who are not, don't force them to complete this activity.
I would say, I don't think this will be in the reality very soon. As they need to get the pulse of the gambling community

I think this will likely be the future of gambling, and maybe the regulators will be the ones to force it into happening because many casinos are well aware that many of their potential clients will fail things like the mandatory knowledge assessment quiz, and they will not be able to gamble, which means they will be losing customers, so they will not be quick to implement some of these.

I don’t think gamblers would acknowledge that because from the very beginning, they already know the risks they are taking. I'm certain that before they started gambling, they had some idea of what they were getting into as they probably did some research.

And even if they answer those questions honestly, I doubt that is how they actually do in real-life situations. In general, these things don’t really matter in gambling because casinos don’t care about the gamblers as we see.

The thing with the regulations of the United Kingdom when comes to cryptocurrency exchanges and other services which try to facilitate Bitcoin/alt coin speculation to a wide percentage of the population of the country is how strict they are when comes to allowing or not people to take risks with their own capital. I have seen people from the UK who literally need to take a quiz before being able to trade and also go full Know-your-client, not basic level but full level (physical address included). It is so strict that actually it would be silly for casinos to adopt those same relations when comes to betting markets, as if people did not know they are actually risking their money. 

Also, we must keep in mind the regulation of the United Kingdom is not international/global, so if a casino was forced (for some reason) to comply with those warnings, quiz and also full KYC before allowing their gamblers to bet, then it would mean that casino would fall into disadvantage in comparison to others which do not make the process of betting a hassle, which make it as simple as depositing and choosing where to bet.
I am okey with people getting more educated about the world of gambling and betting, but building barrier after barrier, after barrier in order for someone over 18 years old to place a simple bet sounds rather like an exaggeration, if you asked me.

It's very different though, for number 1, we already know that once we gamble so I do not see it preventing gamblers from losing money. And that is the definition of gambling, risk=reward. So as much as we tell them that philosophy, majority might not adhere to that.

Same with number 2, doesn't make sense for them to acknowledge that kind of "restriction", gambler will be gamblers and they are going to risk more as they see it.

Nah, even if they passed this kind of quiz, gamblers have totally different mindset when the actual betting starts.

The idea can be adopted but it shouldn't be mandatory. The purpose of every gambler coming to a new casino for the first time is to have a good experience depositing, gambling, and withdrawing their funds. Having to go through some series of questions for whatsoever reason may look too tiring for many gamblers they will rather leave the casino and move on to the next option.

Like I said it should be of free will for the gamblers to pas through this quiz. For those who want to learn through the quiz let them click the option by themselves. Any feature to be added to a casino should be checked if it improves the user experience for the gambler. If it does not then it shouldn't be implemented in the casino. The headache of losing and the problems that some casinos give to their user is enough already.

Hmm yes, good topic, I think your idea about the rules is indeed appropriate to be applied in gambling with the aim of reminding gamblers that they are in a possible risk outside of the chance of winning. However, anything that leads to understanding for the sake of prevention will always be a good idea, my friend, because then I think a gambler should not play impulsively or aggressively because of the fear of losing all the money he has.

But on the other hand, the problem here in my opinion is, is there something like a punishment that can prevent a gambler from betting because they ignore all the warnings? If there is, that's good, but another thing I think here is whether it is possible for the casino to make such rules that lead to various preventions so that gamblers do not lose too much money while the purpose of the casino creating all the games is to profit from the gamblers who lose?

The bigger question is, will the regulators be able to provide all the necessary tools that check every casino to know what is the level of compliance with such gambling rules, and what is the accuracy of the information and data provided by the gamblers?

Will this initiative increase casinos revenue or reduce their net income and how that result affect their financial and running cost?

This is what casinos will look into before they consider adopting such rules, although this is all in the interest of the gambler which is good if implemented properly.