Honest note, anonymity isn't a way around self-exclusion
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2026 11:33 pm
Saw a comment in another thread, paraphrasing, "if you self-excluded somewhere just use a no-kyc crypto site, they don't know who you are." Want to push back on that hard because it's the exact wrong way to use the no-kyc thing.
Two points. One, no-kyc means less signup friction, email and a password, not permanent anonymity. They can and do ask for ID at withdrawal, on high volume, or if anything looks off. So the "they'll never know me" plan also means you might not be able to cash out.
Two, and this is the real one. If you've self-excluded, the goal was to stop, not to find a door without a guard. Picking a site specifically because it won't recognize you is just helping yourself break the thing you set up to protect yourself. The tech isn't the problem there, the reason for using it is.
If you're at the point of hunting for a site that won't know you, that's the signal to step back, not to optimize the workaround.
Two points. One, no-kyc means less signup friction, email and a password, not permanent anonymity. They can and do ask for ID at withdrawal, on high volume, or if anything looks off. So the "they'll never know me" plan also means you might not be able to cash out.
Two, and this is the real one. If you've self-excluded, the goal was to stop, not to find a door without a guard. Picking a site specifically because it won't recognize you is just helping yourself break the thing you set up to protect yourself. The tech isn't the problem there, the reason for using it is.
If you're at the point of hunting for a site that won't know you, that's the signal to step back, not to optimize the workaround.