11 måneder siden
Hvis du vil diskutere noget i relation til Joker.io Casino – det kan være spil, bonusser, betalingsmetoder, problemer med din konto, ansvarligt spil og alt muligt andet – kan du gøre det her.
Joker.io Casino – generel debat
1
2
Skriv indlæg
11 måneder siden
Dette casino opererede tidligere under Curaçao. På det tidspunkt bad jeg om at få blokeret hele deres casinogruppe på grund af en alvorlig ludomani. Det lykkedes på det tidspunkt. Året var 2022-2023, da jeg satte blokeringerne. For omkring et år siden blev de gamle blokeringer dog fjernet uden varsel. Jeg kunne bruge deres Curaçao-baserede casinoer igen, selvom jeg før ikke engang kunne logge ind på grund af blokeringerne. Er der nogen grund til at klage over dette, eller kan de lovede blokeringer fjernes bare af den grund? Selvom det faktisk er blevet sagt, at jeg er blokeret af deres Curaçao-licens.
Automatisk oversættelse:
11 måneder siden
Hello Mag7,
Every concern is worth raising a complaint because we can only retroactively determine whether it "was worth it" based on the process itself. This is a very good point, by the way, and in my opinion, it may partly depend on whether the block was associated with the license, such as when you sent your request to the license provider and were self-excluded at this level based on its interaction, or if it was your request that was forwarded to the casino. I'm just thinking aloud here; I can be entirely wrong, but I can somehow imagine casinos saying something similar...
This situation is, in my opinion, worth a look—definitely.
My colleagues will surely provide more details.
11 måneder siden
Jeg bad om at få blokeret hele deres Curaçao-licens. Senere spurgte jeg igen, at jeg var blokeret for hele licensen. De svarede, at jeg var blokeret for hele licensen på grund af ludomani. Dette var i 2023, da casinoet stadig opererede under Curaçao. Noget ændrede sig i 2024, og de gamle blokeringer blev fjernet uden varsel. Før dette kunne jeg ikke logge ind/indbetale på deres Curaçao-casinoer.
Jeg synes, de i det mindste burde have annonceret, om de ikke længere kan beholde blokkene. Jeg forstår ikke, hvorfor de pludselig fjernede dem og nægter at svare på noget om det.
Automatisk oversættelse:
11 måneder siden
This was the conversation that took place when they were still under Curacao lisence. If they have told me this, can they all The sudden now allow me to use their sites again?
11 måneder siden
Så hvad skal man gøre i en situation, hvor et casino har lovet at blokere en licens, men pludselig har fjernet den og nu siger, at det ikke er muligt at blokere en licens? Hvilket af disse er gyldigt, hvad casinoet siger nu, eller hvad der blev sagt før?
Automatisk oversættelse:
11 måneder siden
Thank you very much for all the details.
I would certainly submit the complaint. For me, the dispute is no longer about whether the casino can do something or not. I believe we had this conversation before. Casinos can do anything but the question is what is responsible and acceptable.
Thus, I would go for the complaint. I agree with you; they should send you a note at least. We may both find out the industry works differently than the license requires.
SvarCiter1
11 måneder siden
Jeg forstår virkelig ikke den slags casinogrupper. De hævder, at der ikke har været en sådan diskussion, og nægter på dette grundlag at udlevere diskussionshistorikken, for eksempel. Nu har de også blokeret mig fra al kundeservice på deres casinoer i Estland og Curaçao.
Jeg synes, det er ekstremt dårlig opførsel fra casinoet, at de ikke kan indrømme deres egne fejl, og at de direkte lyver for at opnå deres egen fordel.
Automatisk oversættelse:
11 måneder siden
They said there has never been such a conversation?!
Again, I'm at a loss for words.
If I may, always back up every communication you have at the casino regarding account closure. To me, this seems like the only way to overcome casinos' unwillingness to play fairly. It is a huge game changer once you can show that they are lying.
Could you please clarify whether this specific casino has self-excluded you or if it has only restricted your overall access to support? I hope I'm wrong here.
Redigeret
11 måneder siden
Yes they did, the most annoying part is that i clearly remember that i have asked to block their curacao lisence. At that time they said it is possible to do due my addiction. Now they say it is not possible to do and they dont offer that. I have been stupid as i have trusted the fact that this lisence block wouldnt go away like that and at least they wouldnt lie regarding the matter later on. I dont lie regarding this, at that time i blocked also few other curacao lisenced. As this conversation clearly shows, this was one of those lisences that set the block.
I have been really trusting towards casinos. Now i definitely know better for sure. They blocked my contacts first under Curacao, later they also did it under their Estonian lisence. Also they have earlier closed my account under Curacao when i contacted their Estonian lisence support. Owner is clearly The same, they just play with different lisences. We can all guess why all of their sites isnt under Estonian, when they clearly would have that opportunity...
11 måneder siden
Well, the way I see it, it was possible to self-exclude from certain license providers—one of the 4 former sublicenses—by submitting an official request through that license, not the casino. I believed we were discussing this specific situation. However, if you approach just the casino and they come up with their own way of excluding you, guess within its group, which has a specific license? It is something else, and we are getting back to the point of the casino's terms and, sadly, the screenshots.
I understand your point; it appears that only the license has changed, and I comprehend that.
However, self-exclusion on the operator/casino level, from the player perspective, has very little to do with specific licenses and therefore should be functioning regardless.
Thus, I believe it is stupid to reopen accounts like this without any warning or questions and keep lying about previous discussions.
Redigeret
11 måneder siden
Well if go to casinos support and ask can i have their whole lisence blocked due my addiction. They say that they agree to this and blocked me entirely from every site under lisence. Later i go to one of their curacao sites to ask that and they confirmed that i'm blocked from the whole lisence. And like i said i even couldnt log in on their curacao casinos with bank details earlier. All this changed last year and all the old blocks had gone away.
They would definitely send me the conversations, If they have done everything correctly. Like why wouldnt they? Of course they clearly can change their responsibility matters, like they clearly have done. However this is just to benefit from addicts. They also could easily set the blocks, like they have done so 2022-2023.
11 måneder siden
Og ja, alle Curaçao-licenser, jeg har fået blokeret, er blevet blokeret via casinoets kundeservice. Så de har altid været i stand til at sætte blokeringerne på plads, enten ved at have kunnet sætte dem selv eller ved at videresende sagen.
Automatisk oversættelse:
11 måneder siden
The latest description is very precise and I see it the same way. Why wouldn't the casino provide the chats if everything was done correctly...
I just sent this information to our Data Team expert Jozef. I'm interested in his opinion on this.
11 måneder siden
Thank you.
11 måneder siden
When i clearly have this screenshot of this conversation, it has happened and i'm sure they have it stored as this has took place 2023.
It is odd for them to say that i dont have any conversation history with this casino, and it is clearly seen they are totally lying about that.
11 måneder siden
Jozef and I agreed that associating self-exclusion with the Curaçao license is nonsensical. It has no meaning aside from misleading the player completely.
Self-exclusion works basically on those levels:
1) 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.)
2) 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 hand with that, once the account is self-excluded due to gambling addiction, no license changes should affect it. That's, pardon my French, bullshit.
If the casino is now saying that they can't exclude you on "license level," that's correct, yet the account should have never been reopened like this in the first place because there has never been a working tool to "exclude by license"...
11 måneder siden
So why then some curacao casinogroups sets blocks If you ask so? As did them also 2022.
For example i still have blocks for every casino under dama NV, Versus odds bv. I can make account just normal but they close it immediately.
And so did this group also, i couldnt log in their sites with My bank id with years 2022-2023. They changed their policy 2024 and no longer offers that clearly.
11 måneder siden
Dama NV er endda så eksemplariske, at de også vil blokere dig med en estisk licens, hvis du har anmodet om en blokering med deres Curacao-licens. Så for eksempel kan jeg ikke bruge nogen af dama NV-ejerens casinoer. Selvom jeg har anmodet om en blokering for licensen, kun ét! Gennem deres underordnede casino.
Automatisk oversættelse:
11 måneder siden
What is mostly my point here, is that even lisence terms allows you to do something do you always have to do exactly like that? We all know that many curacao casinogroups could easily set blocks for their management casinos. But when curacao lisence allows them to not to do that, most decides to take benefit from this.
When we talk sites that has same support, same management, same owner. Most cases there isnt any valid reason why they wouldnt set blocks If it is asked. Just because they are allowed to do so, of course they want to benefit from that.
Like i said for example dama NV has set the blocks for every casinos they have, both Estonian and curacao lisence. Even when i only asked this from one casino under their curacao lisence. They operate with totally independent sites, with different support etc. That is an example that you dont always have to do everything what your lisence terms allows you to do. As a owner of casinos, you can always choose the responsible way to act.
1
2
Skriv indlæg
