Slotty Vegas - UK self-exclusion breach

Status
Not open for further replies.

ThePOGG

Meister Member
webmeister
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
UK
Wow...

Now a serious question:
Can we add betblocker as a solution to help customers control gambling within our responsible gaming pages?


BetBlocker is a project we set up a little over a year ago. Basically it's an app that users can download onto their device and that will restrict their device from accessing thousands of online gambling sites. It allows the user to select the length of the restriction and provides a cooling off period if you decide to deactivate after the exclusion ends.

There are several other products on the market that do this, but they all charge the user. I've never been massively comfortable with that. The one thing that people who need software to help them stop gambling tend to have in common is that they don't have enough money. So BetBlocker was developed to address this. It's free, it doesn't advertise anything and we don't gather any user information (so we can never be accused of using this for marketing purposes).

We haven't really properly launched this yet as it's still in 'beta' levels of development. The desktop versions were very straightforward to put together and work effectively. The mobile versions have been a nightmare on that front. The mobile platforms make it difficult to put in place the necessary restrictions to stop it being removed and once we've got round that (only Android so far, still working on iOS) there have been other issues with BetBlocker interfering with some users internet connection (due to either poor signal strength or conflicts with other apps they've installed). We don't want to push this out to operators until I'm really confident that the product is delivering an 'excellent' level of service. So, yes anyone (operator, affiliate, regulator) is free to include this in their Responsible Gambling material, no permission is required, but it may be wise to give us a little more time to polish the product to a decent level especially given that the majority of the market is now mobile.

TP
 

L&L-Jan

Affiliate Manager for Accredited Casinos
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Location
Malta
Thanks ! Yeah I knew about this project as it was discussed last year during our bar event.

We will wait when mobile is polished accordingly as indeed, 60% of the users are mobile :)

Kr. Jan
 

EkJR

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Location
Glasgow
BetBlocker is a project we set up a little over a year ago. Basically it's an app that users can download onto their device and that will restrict their device from accessing thousands of online gambling sites. It allows the user to select the length of the restriction and provides a cooling off period if you decide to deactivate after the exclusion ends.

There are several other products on the market that do this, but they all charge the user. I've never been massively comfortable with that. The one thing that people who need software to help them stop gambling tend to have in common is that they don't have enough money. So BetBlocker was developed to address this. It's free, it doesn't advertise anything and we don't gather any user information (so we can never be accused of using this for marketing purposes).

We haven't really properly launched this yet as it's still in 'beta' levels of development. The desktop versions were very straightforward to put together and work effectively. The mobile versions have been a nightmare on that front. The mobile platforms make it difficult to put in place the necessary restrictions to stop it being removed and once we've got round that (only Android so far, still working on iOS) there have been other issues with BetBlocker interfering with some users internet connection (due to either poor signal strength or conflicts with other apps they've installed). We don't want to push this out to operators until I'm really confident that the product is delivering an 'excellent' level of service. So, yes anyone (operator, affiliate, regulator) is free to include this in their Responsible Gambling material, no permission is required, but it may be wise to give us a little more time to polish the product to a decent level especially given that the majority of the market is now mobile.

TP

Cheers mate, sounds interesting. Hopefully gambling companies can incorporate it sometime in the future.
 

cncas2123

Meister Member
Joined
May 23, 2015
Location
Belfast
BetBlocker is a project we set up a little over a year ago. Basically it's an app that users can download onto their device and that will restrict their device from accessing thousands of online gambling sites. It allows the user to select the length of the restriction and provides a cooling off period if you decide to deactivate after the exclusion ends.

There are several other products on the market that do this, but they all charge the user. I've never been massively comfortable with that. The one thing that people who need software to help them stop gambling tend to have in common is that they don't have enough money. So BetBlocker was developed to address this. It's free, it doesn't advertise anything and we don't gather any user information (so we can never be accused of using this for marketing purposes).

We haven't really properly launched this yet as it's still in 'beta' levels of development. The desktop versions were very straightforward to put together and work effectively. The mobile versions have been a nightmare on that front. The mobile platforms make it difficult to put in place the necessary restrictions to stop it being removed and once we've got round that (only Android so far, still working on iOS) there have been other issues with BetBlocker interfering with some users internet connection (due to either poor signal strength or conflicts with other apps they've installed). We don't want to push this out to operators until I'm really confident that the product is delivering an 'excellent' level of service. So, yes anyone (operator, affiliate, regulator) is free to include this in their Responsible Gambling material, no permission is required, but it may be wise to give us a little more time to polish the product to a decent level especially given that the majority of the market is now mobile.

TP
I have to say I used Betblocker for a few weeks and it’s an excellent tool, it isn’t intrusive as in you don’t need email address or user details and when I did have a slight issue with it Duncan responded to my email with a solution, so I can’t speak highly enough of what they are doing by providing this service at no charge to the user. I would hope somewhere down the line they will get same kind of income from it as they deserve to be rewarded for providing this product.
 

ThePOGG

Meister Member
webmeister
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
UK
I have to say I used Betblocker for a few weeks and it’s an excellent tool, it isn’t intrusive as in you don’t need email address or user details and when I did have a slight issue with it Duncan responded to my email with a solution, so I can’t speak highly enough of what they are doing by providing this service at no charge to the user. I would hope somewhere down the line they will get same kind of income from it as they deserve to be rewarded for providing this product.

Hi cncas2123 - thanks very much for the positive feedback! It's always great to hear that the tool is helping people, though I do understand people's frustrations when it does something unexpected.

For us BetBlocker isn't really about making money. It's a great way to give back to the community that supports us, it helps people who really need and deserve the help and eventually, once we've identified any significant bugs and addressed them, we will promote this more strongly and it'll be a great part of the branding that we want to build round ThePOGG. We don't need users to pay for it, sponsorship or data gathering for this to reflect positively on us and help build the trust that we strive to engender.

TP
 

Slottery

Senior Member
PABnoaccred
MM
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Location
Malta
All such of software is welcome which help problem gamblers, only for ever problem is that they are not pullet proof and one who really want can find way to gamble, there it comes to players own responsibility. Casinos and UKGC/MGA should (and they will what i've been understanding) introduce license wild self-exclusion scheme which all casinos need to be integrated. Strong enough triggers should be name and DOB not to make too many false matches and if there are two John Smiths born exactly same date in England, opening account after investigation is not that hard.

As stated from casino reps, self-exclusion abusers are unfortunately quite common who trying their luck to get freeroll, then if manage to win make big issue if casino voids them (nothing to related OP:s issue but these last posts about BetBlocker and issue in common).

Maybe some hard working moderator would like to clean up little bit this topic and transfer conversation between two posters to it's own topic? Quite many of us have spent good time of nice Saturday by reading this (again, not taking part or giving any opinion to that bit overhauled conversation but just bit off topic) ;)
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
... Maybe some hard working moderator would like to clean up little bit this topic and transfer conversation between two posters to it's own topic?

Yeah, I had considered that but at the very least I wanted to let the dust settle a bit.
 

ThePOGG

Meister Member
webmeister
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
UK
All such of software is welcome which help problem gamblers, only for ever problem is that they are not pullet proof and one who really want can find way to gamble, there it comes to players own responsibility. Casinos and UKGC/MGA should (and they will what i've been understanding) introduce license wild self-exclusion scheme which all casinos need to be integrated. Strong enough triggers should be name and DOB not to make too many false matches and if there are two John Smiths born exactly same date in England, opening account after investigation is not that hard.

You couldn't be more right. There is nothing we could ever put together that would be 100% bullet proof. If you're really determined to get round this type of restriction you'll get round it. This sort of system isn't intended to be an absolute barrier, but is intended to be a tool that you can use to help you as you try to take control yourself. Just like GamStop, in that respect.

TP
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
Ok, there seems to be a bit of confusion here about what is happening re the ban of mac72, then ThePogg, then the closure of this thread. I'll try and clear a bit of this up if I can.

I believe the trouble began when I asked mac72 to leave ThePogg's relationship with his wife out of the discussion here. I did, and do, believe that that part of the discussion came about because mac72 was trying to belittle and discredit ThePogg and that was not something that was acceptable nor did these comments of his have anything to do with the topic at hand.

mac72 saw fit to dismiss my request and attack my attempts to moderate the situation. I don't think anyone was too surprised that the result was a temporary ban for mac72. FTR that original ban was going to be 1 week.

After the mac72 ban new information came to light that made me think that it was best to extend his ban until Bryan returned and had a chance to look things over and make a final decision. FYI he is in the US for a few weeks and has dodgy internet access, then he'll be in London for ICE, etc. So his final decision on mac72 was not going to happen any time soon.

I discussed this situation with Dunover (because he is a fellow moderator here) and ThePogg (because I thought he might catch some stick through no fault of his own when mac72's extended ban was announced). Since mac72 and ThePogg were essentially co-combatants in this thread ThePogg felt it best if he was removed from the equation alongside mac72 until the issue was resolved one way or the other. In the name of even-handedness I agreed with his suggestion and he was (temporarily) banned as well.
[Later: apparently people hated seeing "ThePogg" in red so I've moved him to "Disabled Account" instead.]

As to the thread being closed (for the time being), same reasoning as above: with the bans now in place the situation had become too volatile and we thought it best to put the thread on hold. That didn't seem too much of a stretch since the thread had basically devolved into a slug-fest between two people who were now on temporary bans.

So there it is. I'm sure those interested will want to have their say but that'll have to wait until Bryan is back at the helm and can deal with the thankless task of sorting out this mess.
 
Last edited:

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
Betat has come to us with a serious complaint regarding the content of this, and possibly other, threads. The issue is unsubstantiated claims being made against them regarding criminal activity, business connections to criminals, abuse of player data, deliberate negligence regarding Responsible Gambling, ADR fraud and so forth.

I hope I don't need to remind everyone that there are Forum Rules here one of which is the following:
1.6 - No "Libelous" Posts. Do not make posts that could be considered libelous, defamatory, or posting merely to cause harm to another's business. Opinions are expected, but do not attack others with accusations of criminal activity unless this has been proven in a court of law.

So, fair warning, those who have made and/or insist on continuing to make those types of accusations against Betat/Slotty Vegas where no proof of said accusations exists will face temporary or permanent bans.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion but if you say "they did this bad thing" and it falls within the scope of "libelous, defamatory, or posting to cause harm to another's business" you'd better have proof to offer otherwise you'll be on the wrong side of the Forum Rules you agreed to as part of the "Terms Of Use" at Casinomeister.

I'll be going back to read this thread over in detail to determine if further immediate action is required against any offending posters.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top