But seriously what kind of predatory policy is that in the first place?

  • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    What even is “self-exclusion”. Are you supposed to not log in for 91 days? Not sure what they’re saying here.

    • Devial@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      By the sound of it, it’s them saying if you want your account permanently closed, you have to voluntarily not use it for 91 days, basically giving you a chance to let addiction suck you back in, and thereby preventing people from immediately closing their accounts when they have a moment of clarity or big loss.

      Otherwise a lot of people would immediately nuke their accounts when they have a really bad losing streak, and that would be real bad for business.

      • smh@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I thought it meant you had to opt-in to be blocked for 24 hours, after which you could opt-in to be blocked for 90 days, making it take more manual steps

        • Devial@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          That’s probably it, that would also explain why it’s two seperate exclusion periods.

          So marginally less predatory than letting you keep access to your account and requiring you to not use it for 91 days just through willpower. Only marginally though

    • mkwt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      I believe that “self exclusion” is a feature where you tell the gambling company you don’t want them to do business with you for the specified period. Then they won’t do business with you during the period, even if you try to come back to them later.

      In some jurisdictions this kind of voluntary blacklist can also be done at the gambling regulator, in which case it would apply to all gambling establishments in the jurisdiction.