Selvudelukkelse for hele Tyskland? (side 2)

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

ja, sandelig

Spørgsmålet er, hvordan man kan forbyde noget, der ikke drives lokalt, men anonymt distribueres på tværs af Sixx-servere, hvilket er almindelig praksis. Du har trods alt en mobiltelefon og kan nemt tilgå enhver hjemmeside, du vil, uanset om den er ulovlig eller ej. Hvad er så pointen med forbud, hvis de er ineffektive?

Undskyld det sene svar. Ligesom min artikel ankom ret sent, er mit svar også forsinket 😅.

Ja, situationen i Storbritannien, som du beskriver den, lyder ret skizofren; så ligner du ikke den tyske situation.

Når man ser nærmere på det, er det næsten det samme her, bortset fra at spillene er tvunget til at søge efter fair casinoer internationalt. I mellemtiden har de fleste casinoer, der normalt opererer med en maltesisk licens, udviklet en tendens til at afvise tyske spillere eller diktere andre grundlæggende krav til dem end til alle andre. For eksempel tilbydes velkomstbonusser nogle gange eksplicit ikke til tyske spillere, og andre bonusser uden indskud er generelt udelukket for tyske spillere. Jeg tror, ​​dette er en beskyttende foranstaltning for at undgå retssager, men det efterlader en bitter eftersmag.

Det er særligt trist, at vi i Tyskland, før denne nye tyske spilletraktat, enten fuldstændig har fortrængt, ødelagt eller forårsaget, at en hel række meget velrenommerede og højt kvalificerede internationale casinoer flyttede og dermed trækker sig helt tilbage fra det tyske marked.

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.

Det er meget heldigt, at en såkaldt globalt bindende forpligtelse tillader spillere at blive udelukket efter egen anmodning.

Jeg synes heller ikke, at du reelt repræsenterer en større indblanding i forretningen, og derfor er jeg overrasket over, at det overhovedet bliver gjort. Hvis nogen ønsker at blive blokeret, så går jeg ud fra, at det vil blive gjort.

Det burde være indlysende for dem, at de ikke bør spille, hvis de ikke kan klare det, eller hvis det ødelægger dem, for der vil altid være måder at spille på igen, uanset om alle online casinoer har udelukket dig eller ej.

Så tager jeg bare på et normalt casino, eller også er der spilleautomater på flere pubber!

Der er så mange muligheder, og hvis den logiske erkendelse ikke kommer indefra om, at man simpelthen bare må lade tingene ske, så ser jeg en dyster fremtid!

Med venlig hilsen, 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.

Hej,

De identificerede problemet korrekt; det er en fejl forårsaget af stemmeinputfunktionen.

Faktisk ville jeg sige, at det er prisværdigt, at de går ind for en global politik.

Desværre er jeg stadig ikke helt klar over, hvordan jeg skal forestille mig, hvordan det kunne udformes.

Jeg tror, ​​at du allerede kan få det blokeret efter eget ønske i alle casinoer alligevel.

Foreslår du, at en blokering automatisk blokerer en person fra alle kasserere, eller hvad er din pointe?

Jeg håber, jeg har kunnet afklare nogle uklarheder!

Med venlig hilsen, 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.

Hej,

Jeg er helt enig med dig. Vi er endelig nødt til at tænke globalt; ikke kun på dette område, men generelt!

Jeg frygter, at status quo næppe kan vendes om, og selvom mange casinoer overholder de fælles aftaler, vil der stadig være nok, der gør, hvad de vil.

Det lumske ved dette er, at der i sidste ende vil opstå en enorm konkurrencemæssig ulempe, der favoriserer umenneskelig adfærd. 🤔

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.

Det behøver du virkelig ikke at undskylde for.

Politik foregår på lokalt niveau og er derfor uegnet til at regulere det decentraliserede 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.