yea, i was agreeing that u should be able to follow him around. however if u were harassing him in chat constantly u now give FTP the reason they need to stop u from doing this if they want. i really dont see how they dont go w/ something more reasonable like a chat ban tho, not banning u from sitting w/ that player ever again.

im still not 100% clear tho. is there specifically a rule against asking for money not to sit w/ a player again or not? i assumed there would be but if not i think FTP is screwing this all up pretty bad by either not implementing the rule or trying to enforce a rule that isnt technically a rule.

Last post in here

Nemo made the effort to follow the guy to lobbies he doen't usually sit (45 mans) and is asking him for money to leave him alone. This is not a threat?What is the difference? you don't need to to menace physical arm for something to be considered a threat.

Ya right...I could be mistaken but it didn't sound like Nemo ask the guy politely if he wanted to go in some sort of agreement

Yes I agree it's competition, but when he goes out of his way to follow him around and use chat abuse and verbal intimidation it's now harrassment IMO

Mafia!!!!!!!

i think every part of nemos behaviour has to be judged independently.

- the fact that he went to an open table from a player who basically stated: "i play anybody" by sitting a lobby, so no matter how often he sits him it cannot be against any terms and conditions

- offering him a deal for not sitting him was making me laugh very hard, but i cannot say how honestly this was meant. even if it was said nonjoking, this should be the reason for a warning or a few days ban at the most

- of course sitting him at 45 man's is lol, but again, more funny than hurtful

- harassing this player verbally was not a good thing on his side. however we do not know how far this went, neither we know what led to their dispute and how the other guy behaved towards nemo. for this kind of behavior a chat ban would be acurate

all things considered, none of his behaviour should lead to a permanent prohibition to sit one individual player. what would happen if the high stakes regs weren't allowed to sit weaker regs who move up to assure their profitability? not allowing to sit a specific player is just absurd and definitely the wrong punishment.

disconnecting nemo while he was playing underlines how nonprofessional fulltilt behaves and i am glad not to play on such an untrustworthy site.

What he did wasn't legally extortion but it was pretty close to it on a douchebag-ery level.

What he did (collectively) was certainly harassment and he deserved what he received from FT.

Not to mention that when a stranger is stalking you obsessively, whether online or in real life, you have every right to assume there's more than zero percent that this complete stranger is capable of more than just cursing you in the chat. I know it sounds crazy but things have happened and although I wouldn't really be concerned in this case I cannot fault someone who will. This stuff is so basic, it doesn't have anything to do with poker. Privacy is a human right.

lol wikipedia

Please construct your own arguments. You still haven't proven that it's unethical for him to give another reg the option of buying out of his attention.

Wiki - extortion:
"Extortion, outwresting, and/or exaction is a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person(s), entity, or institution, through coercion. Refraining from doing harm is sometimes euphemistically called protection. Extortion is commonly practiced by organized crime groups. The actual obtainment of money or property is not required to commit the offense. Making a threat of violence which refers to a requirement of a payment of money or property to halt future violence is sufficient to commit the offense. Exaction refers not only to extortion or the unlawful demanding and obtaining of something through force,[1] but additionally, in its formal definition, means the infliction of something such as pain and suffering or making somebody endure something unpleasant.[2]"

After thinking about it some more I actually think asking for money isn't that bad, its definately not illegal since OP had the right to sit this player anyway.

People saying its pizzo/extortion or whatever are wrong since in those cases they are trying to make a gain from something they don't lawfully have the right to do.


Looking briefly through the T+Cs (apparantly I have alot of freetime) it appears that the only rule OP has broken is:

11.6. HARASSMENT

You are prohibited from harassing any player on our site. Such harassment may result in the suspension or termination of your account. Harassment includes, but is not limited to, following a player across multiple tables, using threatening language, and making racial or sexual comments.


Since I don't really feel it violates any of these (no not threatening, its not like the OP said he is going to hunt him down if he doesn't pay up).


11.1. OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE OR CONTENT

You are prohibited from submitting to us or making any unlawful, obscene, libelous, defamatory, threatening, or other comments, content or material that would violate any law, via the Software (online chat), online forums or in correspondence with our staff, agents or sub-contractors.



Which like many people have said could really set a precedent that could cause a ton of problems for ftp.

this is alread tl;dr , cliff notes plz???

Cliffs: OP didn't do anything illegal.

Are you for real? Do you think I can prove you something is unethical? I happen to have academic education in philosophy and the first thing you learn in moral philosophy is that you can attack ANY moral statement because moral is such an abstract thing. So I can't prove what's ethical, I can prove what kind of behaviors causes damage to society and are against the rights we believe all humans have.

You disregard Wikipedia but you didn't give any other source to contradict my argument. Let me quote the law for you so you can understand my argument better.

Under section21(1) of the Theft Act 1968 of English law, a person commits the offence if , with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces;

And now you'll ask: How's menaces are defined? So let me tell you.

The Act uses the word "menaces", which is considered wider in scope than "threat" and involves a warning of any consequences known to be considered unpleasant by the intended victim.

You see the part I marked there? Read it. Then read it again. Then STFU or start making reasonable arguments.

You quote the wrong law.

Crimes Act 1958 - SECT 87

87. Blackmail

You can see the first part in my previous post. I will add another part here:

(2) The nature of the act or omission demanded is immaterial, and it is also
immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person
making the demand.

Yeah its not blackmail because he isn't going to reveal information about him.

lol wait, so husng ppl actually do extort fees from ppl in order to not sit in both their hu games and small tournaments? wtf this is hilarious. i thought the whole thing about nemo asking for a fee was a joke, didnt realize it was actually practiced. hahahaha

Yea, this happens plenty and seems like a good creative solution in many cases.

I've never done it myself, but I know plenty of people that have been on both ends of it.

I've also heard of similar things like "I won't sit you if you give up the lobby whenever I ask for it" and people complying.

I've asked people to pay my rake as an alternative to playing a match out, as many others have. I've never had anybody accept, it usually just gets them to stop asking to chop and just play the match out.

Can you read???

Search for the part in the law that talks about revealing information. Let me know when you find it. I just quoted a paragraph saying :

"it is also immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand"

Revealing information is an action, right? Well, guess what? IT IS IMMATERIAL WEATHER WE THREAT TO DO IT OR NOT!

This is the lowest level of discussion I have ever witnessed and from such an intelligent community this is something I did not expect. I go to sleep.

FYP

Fine - what makes you so sure it's unethical?

Awesome, so have legal authorities go after Nemo and leave the law out of a discussion that is not about the actions of a legal authority?

All you did is come in, talk about how much you personally dislike the OP's actions, cry about how you shouldn't have to back up your ethical argument and tell people to "STFU." If the level of discussion is low, it's not without your influence.

Why were you spite sitting him anyway? (in the 45-mans that is). I understand if you want the lobby free in the games you play, but what did he say that made you so irate?

its irrelevant anyway since OP believed he had reasonable grounds to make this offer.

Yoni: this is qed btw

Do you not see that your definition of blackmail is nothing close to asking for a non-sitting fee? He is not threatening to expose information to the public.

/ your reasoning

See ya later gn

Meh, OP did nothing wrong except rake up a ton of terrible karma. I think your actions were incredibly douchy and if you didn't have the safety of the interwebs you'd never try to pull this (or something analogous?) in the non-cyber world. Maybe you would, but that would indicate a sever case of myopia imo.