Self-exclusion for all of Germany? (page 2)

We wish the same to you, I hope you will do well in life. 🙂

yes indeed

The question is how to prohibit something that isn't operated locally but anonymously distributed across sixx servers, which is common practice. After all, you have a mobile phone and can easily access any website you want, whether it's illegal or not. Therefore, what's the point of bans if they're ineffective?

Please excuse the late reply. Just as my article arrived quite late, my answer is also delayed 😅.

Yes, the situation in Great Britain, as you describe it, sounds quite schizophrenic; then you are not similar to the German situation.

Looking at it closely, it's almost the same here, except that the games are forced to search for fair casinos internationally. Meanwhile, most casinos, which usually operate with a Maltese license, have developed a tendency to reject German players or dictate different basic requirements to them than to everyone else. For example, welcome bonuses are sometimes explicitly not offered to German players, and other no-deposit bonuses are generally excluded for German players. I think this is a protective measure to avoid lawsuits, but it leaves a bitter aftertaste.

What is particularly sad is that in Germany, before this new German gambling treaty, we have either completely displaced, destroyed, or caused a whole series of very reputable and highly qualified international casinos to relocate and thus withdraw completely from the German market.

I believe once the player feels the urge for closing the account immediately, the self-exclusion due to gambling addiction has its meaning. However, the main problem has always remained the same in my eyes.

As the number of separate licenses increases, so do the obstacles to establishing a unified process that can be shared across those different licenses. My coworkers have been working on that for a while, as we think one shared blueprint will be more effective and better used by players and casinos. No matter whether the license is offshore or local.

I'd like to thank you for all those posts and for describing the process that set many casinos to exile. Undoubtedly, this is a contributing factor to the problem.

It is very fortunate that a so-called globally binding obligation allows players to be excluded at their own request.

I also think that you don't really represent a major intrusion into the business, and therefore I'm surprised that it's even being done. If someone wants to be blocked, then I assume that it will be done.

It should be obvious to them that they shouldn't gamble if they can't handle it or if it ruins them, because there will always be ways to gamble again, regardless of whether all online casinos have banned you or not.

Then I'll just go to a normal casino, or there are slot machines in several pubs!

There are so many possibilities, and if the logical realization doesn't come from within that one simply has to let things happen, then I see a bleak future!

Best regards, Simon

To be honest, I'm ot sure I follow you here, and perhaps it is once more a sort of bad translation, because "It is very fortunate that a so-called globally binding obligation allows players to be excluded at their own request" or "I also think that you don't really represent a major intrusion into the business, and therefore I'm surprised that it's even being done. If someone wants to be blocked, then I assume that it will be done." seems very odd to me given your previous posts. Can you help me understand the true meaning of your words, please?

In any case, this is a very complex subject, and I prefer to respond only when I am certain I am following the correct context. I agree that people are accountable for their actions; however, the nature of all obsessive addictions directly contradicts this responsibility.

Hello,

They correctly identified the issue; it is a bug caused by the voice input function.

Actually, I wanted to say it's commendable that they are advocating for a global policy.

Unfortunately, I'm still not entirely clear on how to imagine how that could be designed.

I believe you can already have it blocked at your own request in every casino anyway.

Are you suggesting that a block automatically blocks someone from all cashiers, or what is your point?

I hope I was able to clear up some uncertainties!

Best regards, Simon

Hello,

oh I see! Now I understand you much better. Thank you.

I was attempting to convey the idea that there is no single way to self-exclude from all online casinos today.

Since each country believes it has the best approach to managing gambling, this leads to a more isolated ecosystem that maintains its own self-exclusion lists, such as OASIS and GAMSTOP.

However, for addicted players, such a situation means that they can only be protected by their national license, not any other licenses.

There are currently two basic levels of self-exclusion:

Single-operator level: Typically, when self-excluding in an online casino, the self-exclusion does not extend to other operators. This creates a problem: self-excluded players can freely access and play at other casino websites, bringing the overall effectiveness of such self-exclusion schemes into question. The Global Self-Exclusion System (GSES) was created to offer a solution that eliminates this problem.

Nationwide/license-wide level: Some countries and online gambling regulators, such as the UK, Sweden, or the Netherlands, operate wider self-exclusion schemes, which require their licensees (operators) to be part of nationwide (license-wide) self-exclusion schemes. These allow players to self-exclude from all casinos licensed in a specific country or by a specific regulator at once, creating a better level of protection.

In my opinion, industry leaders and local governments should think globally.

Hello,

I completely agree with you. We finally need to think globally; not just in this area, but in general!

I fear the status quo can hardly be reversed, and even if many casinos adhere to the joint agreements, there will still be enough that do what they want.

The insidious thing about this is that, in the end, a huge competitive disadvantage will arise, favoring inhumane behavior. 🤔

I will very likely sound a bit unethical, but I believe that politicians should handle politics, not regulate gambling markets; let the experts explain the side effects of fractured markets and then think that through.

My apologies, I had to say this. 🙂

In any case, you appear to be very knowledgeable, and I'm delighted to have the opportunity to speak with you.

You really don't need to apologize for that.

Politics takes place at the local level and is therefore unsuitable for regulating the decentralized internet.

It seems that we are like-minded people. As an analytical person, I find it hard to pretend that the collateral damages from country-based licenses and regulations were not predictable and avoidable.

Well, the gambling world truly needs an ultimate tool for helping addicted players easily self-exclude from casinos, at least on a license-based level.

I hope you enjoy the holiday season and once more, I appreciate your input.