Dragi LuckiMak Casino,
Hvala na datom objašnjenju. Želeo bih da napomenem da je samoisključivanje zbog problema sa kockanjem veoma ozbiljan problem jer igrači često gube kontrolu nad svojim postupcima i ne razmišljaju racionalno. Informisanje kazina o potencijalnom problemu kockanja je važan deo procesa samoisključenja i mi u Casino.Guru verujemo da ukoliko igrač ima problem sa kockanjem i obavesti kazino o tome, njegov nalog treba da bude trajno zatvoren bez mogućnosti otvaranje (osim određenih situacija kao što je kada je već prošao dovoljno dug period samoisključenja - govorimo o godinama) i takođe relevantan proces ponovnog otvaranja, koji uključuje dovoljan period hlađenja (ne dan, već najmanje nedelju dana, idealno dva) kao i komunikacija sa igračem tokom ovog perioda hlađenja radi provere da li je zahtev urađen zdravorazumski i da nije bio samo privremeni neuspeh.
U ovom slučaju, vremenski okvir procesa samoisključenja je bio predug (13,4 - 2,6). Preporučujemo da unapredite ceo proces. Samoisključivanje zbog zavisnosti od kockanja trebalo bi da se izvrši u roku od nekoliko dana. U ovom slučaju, to je bilo više od mesec dana. Dakle, igrač treba da ima pravo da dobije povraćaj svojih depozita od 18.4. do dana gašenja računa.
Želeo bih da vas pitam da li smo dobro razumeli situaciju ili postoji još neka informacija o tome zašto je igraču sa problemom kockanja dozvoljeno da ponovo otvori svoj nalog i igra tako lako.
Dear LuckyMax Casino,
Thank you for the provided explanation. I would like to mention that self-exclusion due to a gambling problem is a very serious issue because the players often lose control over their actions and are not thinking rationally. Informing the casino about a potential gambling problem is an important part of the self-exclusion process and we at Casino.Guru believe that if a player has a gambling problem and informs the casino about it, their account should be permanently closed without the possibility of opening (except for certain situations like when a long enough self-exclusion period has already passed - we are talking about years) and also a relevant reopening process, which includes a sufficient cool off period (not a day but at least a week, ideally two) and also communication with the player during this cool-off period for verifying if the request was made in sound mind and wasn't just a temporary failure.
In this case, the self-exclusion process timeframe was too long (13.4 - 2.6). We recommend improving the whole process. The self-exclusion due to gambling addiction should be carried out within a couple of days. In this case, it was over a month. Therefore, the player should be entitled to get a refund of their deposits from 18.4. until the day of the account closure.
I would like to ask you if we understood the situation correctly or if there is any other information as to why was the player with a gambling problem allowed to reopen his account and play so easily.
Automatski prevedeno:
