Responsible Gambling Specialist Interview

The responsible game is not a "banner with a disclaimer," but a cross-functional system of politics, data, UX, interventions and training. We talked to an RG specialist (generalized interview) to figure out how to reduce harm in practice without destroying the honest gaming experience.

1) RG Specialist Role Today

Q: What is in your area of responsibility?

Answer (expert): Three blocks:

1. Prevention: Policy and design (limits, pauses, reality checks, UX no pressure).

2. Detection and intervention: risk models, rules, escalation scenarios, case managers.

3. Reporting and training: harm-reduction KPI, auditing solutions, front-line and marketing trainings.

My mission is to build RG into product and commercial goals so that any solution passes RG verification.

2) Risk signals: what really works

Question: What patterns do you rely on?

Answer: On a combination of behavioral and financial indicators:

Acceleration of the rhythm of sessions and deposits, especially at night (00: 00-05: 00).
"Dogon" (rising stakes after losing streak), declining game diversity.
Frequent withdrawal cancellations, split deposits, "micro-replenishment."
Limit changes after loss, ignore pauses/reminders.
Negative appeals in support ("lost control"), if there is consent - the tone of the messages.
All signals are consolidated at risk, but the solution is always complemented by human reassessment.

3) Stepped care interventions

Q: How do you intervene to avoid hurting UX?

Answer: Apply the ladder from soft to strict:

1. Micro-clues in the moment: "You've been playing for 90 minutes. Pause?"

2. Offer limits: deposit/loss/time, with ready presets.

3. Mandatory pause: a short "respite" before a new deposit at night bursts.

4. Dialogue with the RG agent: assessment of the situation, joint plan.

5. Technical limitations: timeout, limit reduction, self-exclusion.

Each step is accompanied by an explanation of the reason and the possibility of revision.

4) Design ethics and "case friction"

Q: Where is the red line at UX?

Answer:

We prohibit "push" patterns, dark UI patterns, timers that push you to rush.
Clear promo rules in 2-3 lines, visible restrictions.
Disabling aggressive offers for any RG signal.
"Friction with purpose": additional confirmation on overnight deposits or after a series of losses.
Accessibility: large controls, clear texts, contrast.

5) RG metrics and evidence of benefit

Question: How do you measure the effect?

Answer:

Harm-reduction KPI: decrease in night deposits, the share of those who set/retained limits, time to intervention.
Quality metrics: the proportion of false escalations (do not annoy "healthy"), the proportion of cases with human validation.
Business gardrails: retention without a rise in the average rate, CSAT after interventions, complaints of "excessive control."
Processes: reaction time (MTTR) to a risk event, log completeness and explainability.

6) Data and privacy

Question: How do you combine analytics and privacy?

Answer: We minimize PII, use pseudonymization and the principle of "minimum necessary." We separately draw up consents, do not analyze personal correspondence without them, and access to data - by role. Models are calibrated and audited, reports are in units.

7) Interaction with product, marketing and anti-fraud

Q: How do you avoid conflicts?

Answer:

We agree with the product RG-gardrails in the specifications of features before development.
With marketing - "white lists" of segments, windows of silence, frequency limits; access to the promo is closed with an RG signal.
With antifraud - mutual exchange of features (device/fingerprint/velocity), but the solutions are different: fraud ≠ risk RG.
Once a week - RG panel with metrics and cases.

8) Regulation and compliance

Q: What requirements are repeated in different jurisdictions?

Answer: Almost everywhere you need:

Limits (deposits/losses/time), timeouts, self-exclusion, "reality checks."
Decision logs, intervention audits, harm-reduction reporting.
Transparent advertising, affiliate control, age verification.
Explainability of automatic measures and the right to human review.

9) Team training and the "human factor"

Question: What should be the training?

Answer:

Front line: recognition of triggers, correct language, de-escalation, route to the RG department.
RG agents: motivational interviewing, working with complex cases, documenting decisions.
Product and marketing: design ethics, promo rules, work-through RG-gardrails.
Engineers/analysts: logging, calibration of models, explainability.
Quarterly trainings + role-playing games.

10) Dealing with controversial cases

Q: What do I do when a player disagrees?

Answer: We offer a transparent appeal: the stated reasons are available, the list of data, the timing of the response. If necessary, external mediation. For repeated controversial cases - a committee with the participation of RG, lawyers and product.

11) Typical operator errors

Question: Where does practice "break" most often?

Answer:

One universal threshold for all segments.
Uncalibrated models → extra friction.
Promo that conflicts with RG signals.
There is no "man in the loop" with strict measures.
Empty journals: decisions are not justified.
Lack of front-line training and de-escalation scenarios.

12) 90-day RG implementation roadmap

Weeks 1-3 - Basis

Gap analysis by policy and interface risk signal map.

Basic features: limits, pauses, reality checks, help pages.

Include decision log and communication templates.

Weeks 4-6 - Detection and UX

Running risk scoring (baseline model + rules).

Soft interventions at the moment, turning off aggressive promos at signals.

Dashboards harm-reduction and quality of cases.

Weeks 7-9 - Escalations and Training

Case management, routes to agents, appeal regulations.

Weekly RG panel, front and marketing training.

Threshold calibration, RG-KPI C-level report.

Weeks 10-12 - Audit and Improvements

"Dry audit" before external audit.

Model Retraining Plan and A/B Scenario Test.

Updating texts, UX prompts and frequency limits.

13) Dashboards RG: What to watch daily

Engagement: D1/D7/D30 retention without an increase in the average rate.

Harm-reduction: overnight deposits, share of limits, time to intervention.

Quality of cases: false positive, manual revaluation share, closing time.

Communications: CSAT after interventions, complaints/appeals.

Processes: completeness of logs, incidents, SLA execution by responses.

14) Practical scenarios (generalized cases)

"Night spiral": detector of acceleration of short sessions + cancellation of output → a soft pause of 10 minutes + a limit offer → − 15-20% of night replenishment, without a drop in long-term LTV.

"Dogon": an increase in the rate after 3-5 losses → a "reality check" and a hint to take a break → reduce complaints of "dishonesty."

"Frequent limit changes": change track + RG agent call → stabilization of behavior, fewer escalations.

15) RG External Audit Readiness Checklist

RG policies, clear texts in the interface, help pages.
Deposit/loss/time limits, timeouts, self-exclusion (end-to-end verified).
Detection logic: signals, thresholds, calibration, stability report.
Intervention ladder with examples of communications.
Journal of decisions and appeals, SLA responses.
Disabling RG signal promos, affiliate registry, and advertising rules.
Training: Front, RG Agents, Product/Marketing, Analytics.
Dashboards and weekly C-level reports on RG-KPI.

A strong Responsible Gambling program is systemic harm risk management, not point bans. It is built on respectful UX, data and human reassessment, transparent reporting and continuous learning. This approach preserves the confidence of players and regulators and makes business sustainable: honest experience, predictable metrics and a healthy long-term economy.