Tool
Consent-State Explorer
Choose a product, a channel and a customer's consent and safeguarding state, and the explorer shows what a conservative send-time check would do: suppress, hold for review, or mark the send eligible for human review only. It never approves a campaign.
The decision order
The explorer applies these checks in order and stops at the first one that fails. It is the same order described in consent-gated player communication workflows.
- The customer is self-excluded or on a national or provincial self-exclusion register: Suppress. Safeguarding takes precedence over any marketing permission.
- A safer gambling flag is set by the customer interaction process: Suppress. A safer gambling flag stops marketing, whatever permissions the customer holds.
- An opt-out or objection to marketing is recorded: Suppress. An explicit opt-out ends marketing on the channels it covers.
- Age and identity are not confirmed: Suppress. Age and eligibility come before any marketing.
- No current opt-in is recorded for this product and channel, or the record says unknown: Suppress. No current affirmative opt-in for this product and channel.
- An opt-in exists but the consent record is not verified: Hold for review. The evidence for the permission, or the market rule, has not been checked.
- Every check above passes: Eligible for human review only. A person still checks the market rules, the message content and safeguarding signals, and approves or stops the send.
Why it is conservative
Every uncertain fact leads to suppression or a hold, never to a send. Self-exclusion comes first because rules such as the Gambling Commission's code 3.5.3 require all reasonable steps to keep marketing away from self-excluded customers. A safer gambling flag set by the customer interaction process ranks with exclusion, so it also suppresses. An objection comes next because the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) calls the right to object to direct marketing "absolute". Product and channel come before record quality because, under code 5.1.12, remote casino, bingo and betting licensees in Great Britain must not send marketing that goes against a customer's product or channel choices.
What it does not do
- It does not know any real customer or connect to any system. Nothing you enter leaves your browser.
- It does not check message content, market rules or timing, and it knows only the safeguarding flags you set.
- Its most positive result is "eligible for human review only". A person must still review the send.
Using it for testing
Each case can be downloaded as a CSV file with a notice that it is an educational simulation. Values that a spreadsheet could read as a formula are escaped. Teams use files like this to document the expected outcome of each seeded account in the workflow test plan. When comparing vendors, ask each one to reproduce the same decisions; see consent and preference platform criteria.
Questions
Why does an unknown consent value suppress instead of holding?
Unknown means no current affirmative opt-in is recorded, and marketing without an opt-in is the outcome the rules are written to prevent. A hold is used only when an opt-in exists but its evidence is incomplete.
Can I change the decision order?
Not in the explorer. If your legal advice sets a different order for your market, build it into your own decision service and test it with your own cases.
Sources
- Gambling Commission, LCCP 3.5.3 Self-exclusion - remote SR code, no date shown.
- Gambling Commission, LCCP Condition 5.1.12 - Direct marketing preferences, no date shown.
- Gambling Commission, LCCP Condition 5.1.11 - Direct electronic marketing consent, no date shown.
- Information Commissioner's Office, Right to object, page dated March 25, 2025 (under review after the Data (Use and Access) Act).
Every source was read on October 28, 2026. How we choose sources: data sources.