It's the player's responsibility
Responsibility...
Casinos are a regulated industry, they have to comply with the laws and licensing conditions in the countries where they operate. They have committed to ensuring the possibility of self-restrictive measures for players.
I think they cannot throw this responsibility on the user, but they have an obligation to ensure it.
I don't know what is complicated about requiring personal data upon registration (name, address, date of birth, or at least KYC verification before the possibility of depositing and playing.
If someone applies self-restrictive measures and in 10 years re-registers, is it really the user's responsibility where he was or was not registered?
There are thousands of ways to create a new account at online casino after requesting self-exclusion.
I didnt use vpn during registration, i done it from the same device.
Precisely because these options exist, they could simply be prevented by requiring verification (at least name, address, date of birth) during the registration process.
Why they didn't implement this verification during registration is up to each person to answer for themselves, I understand now.
I broke a rule that was supposed to protect me as a player and bc.game helped me by freezing my funds in the amount of 29 ETH. Doesn't that sound strange?
And when a casino do this, some will condemn it as an act against privacy and the very root of crypto pseudoanonymity. There is a reason why casinos only ask KYC upon violation or big win or other event that worth investigating [excepting Stake that require basic KYC upon registration]. They're tiptoeing between being compliant to international-government bodies [namely: your and everyone's country] to restrict the growth of crypto and the "privilege" of anonymity that crypto offered [namely, by imposing label of AML/ATF] and to give as many leeway and provacy to the cryptousers.