Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Goggelheimer, post: 7288288, member: 1014308"] A player “blacklist” in poker can feel like a double‑edged sword: on one hand, the industry already uses blacklists for operators—not players—to protect customers from unsafe or fraudulent sites, so the idea of protecting the game isn’t new. But when the target becomes individual players rather than rogue platforms, the risk of unfair exclusion and opaque decision‑making grows quickly. A centralized list could help keep out proven cheaters, yet without transparent standards it can slide into a form of private censorship that harms honest players. The gambling industry shows that blacklists do exist—mostly for casinos or poker rooms that fail to pay out winnings, lack licenses, or manipulate games—so the concept is familiar but traditionally aimed at protecting players, not punishing them. That’s why a player blacklist is both tempting and dangerous: it could strengthen integrity, but only if governed with strict evidence, oversight, and the right to appeal. How casinos handle banned‑player lists • Every major casino maintains its own internal exclusion list. These include people caught cheating, using advantage‑play techniques the casino dislikes, causing disturbances, or violating house rules. • These lists are not centralized, but within a casino group (e.g., MGM, Caesars, Genting), the list is usually shared across all properties. If you’re banned at one MGM casino, you’re typically banned at all MGM casinos. • Casinos do talk to each other informally. At industry conferences, security‑director meetups, and private networks, information about known cheaters or scam groups is often exchanged. It’s not an official “industry blacklist,” but it functions like a professional grapevine. • There are centralized lists, but only for serious cases. For example, Nevada’s “Black Book” (the List of Excluded Persons) is a state‑run, public list of individuals permanently banned from all Nevada casinos due to organized crime ties or major cheating operations. Other jurisdictions have similar regulatory lists. • Online gambling operators also share data, especially through fraud‑prevention networks, anti‑money‑laundering systems, and identity‑verification services. Again, not a public blacklist—more like shared risk databases. What this means for the original question So when people debate a “blacklist of poker players,” it’s happening in a world where blacklists already exist—but historically they target criminal behavior, not just “players the community dislikes.” That’s why the idea feels both familiar and dangerous: the infrastructure for exclusion already exists, but expanding it to community‑driven lists risks abuse, bias, and opaque decision‑making. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us