1 m?nad sedan
Om du vill diskutera n?got relaterat till Joker.io Casino – det kan vara spel, bonusar, betalningsmetoder, problem med ditt konto, ansvarsfullt spelande eller n?got annat – kan du g?ra det h?r.
Joker.io Casino – generell diskussion
1
2
Skriv inl?gg
Head of Community & Social Media
1 m?nad sedan
Detta casino brukade vara verksamt under Cura?ao. Vid den tidpunkten bad jag om att f? blockera hela deras casinogrupp p? grund av ett allvarligt spelberoende. Det lyckades vid den tidpunkten. ?ret var 2022-2023 n?r jag satte blockeringarna. Men f?r ungef?r ett ?r sedan togs de gamla blockeringarna bort utan f?reg?ende meddelande. Jag kunde anv?nda deras Cura?ao-baserade casinon igen, men innan dess kunde jag inte ens logga in p? grund av blockeringarna. Finns det n?gon anledning att klaga p? detta eller kan de utlovade blockeringarna tas bort bara f?r det? ?ven om det faktiskt har sagts att jag ?r blockerad av deras Cura?ao-licens.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
1 m?nad sedan
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.
1 m?nad sedan
Jag bad om att f? blockera hela deras Cura?ao-licens. Senare fr?gade jag igen om jag var blockerad f?r hela licensen. De svarade att jag var blockerad f?r hela licensen p? grund av spelberoende. Detta var 2023, n?r casinot fortfarande var under Cura?ao. N?got f?r?ndrades 2024 och de gamla blockeringarna togs bort utan f?reg?ende meddelande. Innan dess kunde jag inte logga in/s?tta in pengar p? deras Cura?ao-casinon.
Jag tycker att de ?tminstone borde ha meddelat om de inte l?ngre kan beh?lla blocken. Jag f?rst?r inte varf?r de pl?tsligt tog bort dem och v?grar att svara p? n?got om det.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
1 m?nad sedan
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?
1 m?nad sedan
S?, vad ska man g?ra i en situation d?r ett casino har lovat att blockera en licens, men pl?tsligt har tagit tillbaka den och nu s?ger att det inte ?r m?jligt att blockera en licens? Vilket av dessa ?r giltigt, vad casinot s?ger nu eller vad som sades tidigare?
Automatiskt ?versatt:
1 m?nad sedan
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.
1
1 m?nad sedan
Jag f?rst?r verkligen inte den h?r typen av casinogrupper. De p?st?r att det inte f?rekommit n?gon s?dan diskussion och v?grar p? grundval av detta att l?mna ut diskussionshistoriken, till exempel. Nu har de ?ven blockerat mig fr?n all kundtj?nst p? sina casinon i Estland och Cura?ao.
Jag tycker att det ?r extremt d?ligt beteende fr?n casinots sida att de inte kan erk?nna sina egna misstag, och att de rent ut sagt ljuger f?r att uppn? sin egen vinning.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
1 m?nad sedan
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.
?ndrad
1 m?nad sedan
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...
1 m?nad sedan
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.
?ndrad
1 m?nad sedan
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.
1 m?nad sedan
Och ja, varje Cura?ao-licens jag har f?tt blockerad har blockerats via casinots kundtj?nst. S? de har alltid kunnat s?tta blockeringarna p? plats, antingen genom att de sj?lva har kunnat st?lla in dem eller genom att vidarebefordra ?rendet.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
1 m?nad sedan
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.
1 m?nad sedan
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.
1 m?nad sedan
Jozef and I agreed that associating self-exclusion with the Cura?ao 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"...
1 m?nad sedan
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.
1 m?nad sedan
Dama NV ?r till och med s? exemplariska att de ?ven blockerar dig med en estnisk licens om du har beg?rt en blockering med deras Curacao-licens. S? till exempel kan jag inte anv?nda n?got av Dama NV-?garens casinon. ?ven om jag har beg?rt en blockering f?r licensen, bara ett! Genom deras underordnade casino.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
1 m?nad sedan
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
