That's me done for the day on here. Have a good one (genuinely!). Cheers.

The "tax" was just an analogy (probably a bad one!) - you clearly aren't going to move on to the reality of what is happening in the here and now - you still want to argue about a (philosophical/ideological) battle that has already been lost.

I just hope the people that could possibly still save the day aren't stuck there too.

The Management 23 Sep 23 10:28 
That's me done for the day on here. Have a good one (genuinely!). Cheers

Genuinely! Ffs

Nobody ever said you had the monopoly on verbal diarrhea f4rty (ffs).

You just state the obvious TM a load of boring pee ffs

BoosterRooster23 Sep 23 11:16Joined: 17 Feb 01 | Topic/replies: 193 | Blogger: BoosterRooster's blog
The whole idea is to stop addiction and gambling harm. The measures being bought in do nothing to solve that.

I pretty much agree with that BR - but I believe it is you that are completely missing the point, as is evidenced by where we are at this point in time (i.e. completely fecked!).

Your argument is that addicts will be addicts - that's a valid argument, those that are snared are beyond help - in many cases that is sadly spot on. But does it mean you don't try to help them at all and/or allow them to be preyed upon because of their weakness?. Does it also mean that you don't try to stem the flow of new addicts? - just say, what will be will be?

There's an argument for all of the above. But if that is your stance - good luck in winning that debate with the "anti-gambling mob! - and more importantly, good luck in winning that debate with the people that make the laws!

The greed of the betting industry is to blame for all this and the RP has sided with them to the detriment of punters and horse racing as well. Another BINGO!

formoftheace23 Sep 23 11:19Joined: 17 Apr 12 | Topic/replies: 10,044 | Blogger: formoftheace's blog
You just state the obvious TM

Thanks for that F4arty - it's true and possibly the first thing you have ever said that I agree with ffs.

TM, you keep saying you agree, then you choose to argue against me anyway.

Yes addicts will be addicts. And I’m not saying they shouldn’t be helped. The only way you can help, is educate, raise awareness, and provide help and services when they need it. I am in favour of all of that.

Restricting peoples betting accounts and asking for bank statements doesn’t help, it just pushes the problem elsewhere.

You keep using words like prey and snared. You are missing the point that not all people who play these games are victims. Go on the casinomeister forum and start spreading your views on there and see what response you get.

People play these games because they want to. Not because they are having them pushed upon them. Same as drink, same as any addiction. People start off because they want to, some, not all, in fact very few, end up addicted and ruining their lives.

You seem to completely over look two facts. 1) there is a demand for slots, FOBT , online roulette, just as there is a demand for football bet builders, lucky 15s and Estonian football. If consumers demand it, someone will supply it.

2) the measures being suggested do nothing to help, if you stop people from gambling against their wishes, they will just go elsewhere. You seem to think that the crypto casinos etc that people will end up in aren’t going to attract addicts and rinse them even worst than the regulated market does. The regulated market is not allowed to send free spins and ‘prey’ upon losers any more. The unregulated market will.

Education, awareness, and help for those who need/ask for it is the only way.

You haven’t offered a single solution.

You can't "fix" it dusty - because you and BR are half right - there will always be addicts. In the absence of an absolute "fix" you can either choose to try and make it a bit better for the future or you can choose to do nothing.

I'd suggest that if you want to make life a bit better (or more difficult) specifically for addicts, the very first thing you would try to do, is to identify them. I've met plenty in my time and can identify one blindfolded from 100 meters in the dark. It's not a monetary amount or income related - it's behavioural. The on-line bookmakers can also smell one from 100 metres with a blindfold!

crude example - depositing £1000 one morning doesn't indicate an addict (imo) - depositing 10 x £100 in one day might (coupled with other behaviour) be an indicative sign.

I really can't be 4rsed today - particularly with you and BR - you don't even accept that addicts exist - you believe they are just lazy, ignorant or feckless people. You can't solve a problem that you don't beleive exists, so discussing the potential solutions with such people is utterly pointless.

Howver failing to discuss potential solutions with people that do believe it's a problem - might be fatal!

Of course I accept addicts exist, I’ve never said anything to the contrary.

I only started engaging with you because you were making out that bookmakers should be identifying addicts in advance and closing their accounts. I pointed out that your logic is deeply flawed, the algorithms throw out way too many false positives, and too many non addicts get their accounts closed as a result. That is what is happening right now with all the restrictions and account closures.

If an Individual says they are not an addict, then that should be that. Having a bookmaker, or somebody like you tell them they are is ridiculous.

You still haven’t offered a single solution. And when pressed for one, you say you can’t be arsed with this and disappear.

It was me who had the problem with the use of ‘addiction’

It was wrongly used for the purpose of the argument.
Those using it say it’s the activity of pressing flashing buttons and noises etc that act as a lure.
When my example of offering free versions prove it isn’t the game side it’s the desire to win money.

Whatever the problem a reasonable education solves it.

I think seeing  " The Anorak " having fall foul of these Restrictions tells you ALL you need to know about the motives behind them, are they saying he looked like he needed help / vulnerable etc ??

Maybe the khoont who made the decision should be forced to read one of his books.!

Dusty if you are truly interested in addiction - google the International Gaming Research Unit or even just google Nottingham Trent University. You won't like it and probably won't agree with any of it - but it might help you see things in a less one dimensional way, as regards gambling addiction.

TM

I don’t know how to say this anymore straight forwardly, but whatever the activity that is being done (be it playing a slot/fobt/making a ‘bet’ on a match, if there were versions exactly the same but without monetary risk/reward available then if that doesn’t solve the problem it’s because people are addicted to the feckless act of winning money.

sparrow 23 Sep 23 12:30 
Spot on glasgow, if someone such as Anorak can get restricted then the whole policy is at the very least, seriously flawed

Obviously had a reason to pull him,who knows what goes on behind the keyboard with certain accounts….

Christ almighty

BR has covered that answer- because of the threat of looming punishments.
Having to comply isn’t the same as agreeing with it.

The word is "consultation" dusty, not arbitration. It is available (right now!).

Bookmakers are (sadly) the only people not involved - as BR points out, that just leaves the "anti's" and the govt to find a solution. And that doesn't appear to be going well imo.

The bookmakers are still stuck in the same time warp as you - "just say no".

I am gutted for you BR - seven goals in the first U21 game this morning and just five in the first-half of the other one. Degenerate addicts (like me) betting in obscure markets will be in clover.

More seriously though, I'm not "taking pleasure" in your situation, I wouldn't wish it on anybody. The fact that BF have chosen to put you in that position and you want to blame everybody else (except for them), I do find that mildly amusing.