About this app
About Pandastic Adventure
CFTC Chairman Michael Selig signaled that possibility back in August. The agency was considering how its existing powers could be used to create a dedicated market structure for digital assets that are standard, he said.
A new type of Designated Contract Market (DCM) dedicated to crypto trading is among the elements being looked at. Selig’s approach would enable existing and perhaps new crypto exchanges to gain CFTC recognition and offer leveraged or margined digital asset products under rules tailored for the sector.
However, the latest filing does not create such a system right away. Its OIRA entry describes the action as a preliminary measure and says it is not economically significant under the relevant review criteria. No legal deadline has been listed for review either.
How to play Pandastic Adventure
“ARGN was created because problem gambling is becoming a bigger issue across Africa and most responsible gambling efforts still happen within individual countries,” Akolade tells iGB. “While many organisations are doing great work, there has been limited opportunity to learn from each other, share research, or work together on common challenges.
“We felt there was a gap for a continent-wide network that could connect organisations, encourage collaboration, and help build a stronger collective voice on player protection. ARGN is not here to replace national organisations or regulators. Its purpose is to support and strengthen the work already being done by bringing people and organisations together.”
But while the ARGN intends to enhance collaboration between stakeholders across the continent, Akolade asserts the aim is to promote “common principles rather than identical regulations”.
About Pandastic Adventure
The conflict stems back to January 2025, when the outgoing Biden administration initially determined that the Vallejo parcel was eligible for gaming.
Interior temporarily rescinded that determination just two months later after newly appointed Secretary Doug Burgum raised concerns over whether the tribe’s historical connection to the land had been thoroughly evaluated.
Scotts Valley filed suit in response. In October 2025, Judge McFadden ruled that Interior had violated the tribe’s due process rights by rescinding the approval without giving prior notice or an opportunity to respond.
