Geez, eating chickens is generally accepted in society, so you're not a scumbag if you eat them, no matter what a minority of the people think (and I have been eating much less meat, so I'm sympathetic to their view). There is no such thing as "what if the vegans are right?" There is no absolute "right" to a question like that. It's whatever the social norms are. Maybe they're changing, but it's still accepted by the vast majority of society.

Ghosting in poker is generally not accepted by the poker community (and it's even stated among participants that it's not allowed, unlike the treatment of chickens), so you're judged by the majority to be a scumbag if you do it.

And I'm not someone that sees issues of ethics as black and white, but that analogy is comparing situations that are not even close.

It's weird that Jungleman is getting more hate than the person that allowed him to ghost.

Nobody knows that person. It makes sense to be critical of the person that is known to the community and not the person you never heard of. There are people that cheat in poker every day, and we can have disdain for all of them, but we have a known personality in this situation that people already had some feeling about what type of person and player he is. No one had that judgment about the other person before.

Around these parts that's called a "Negreanu"

Fair enough.

I change my screen name every so often. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, I do it to gain an edge, just like I use many other poker tools like HUDS, or in the past I used data tracking and things like that. I know many other people are doing it and I'm at a disadvantage if I don't. Does the poker community view me as a scumbag? I think what Jungle did is obviously worse, but it's a fairly fine line. In my case I've never misrepresented myself as someone else. I'm just someone "new" who really isn't.

Wait, so Jungleman thought getting into a private game he wasn't allowed to play in and then playing under the guise that he was a big money recreational player was not wrong? Is he brain dead?

Did you break the rules and cheat ?

yeah it's like if you gets cheated on, then you're more mad at the dude who ****ed your girl than your girl lmfao

Poker has rules, they're written down somewhere, I think. It's not cheating because none of these rules were broken.

Somebody managed to sneak into a game uninvited. It's like a 12 year old kid with a friend at a movie theater buys snacks, sodas, and tickets to see Innerspace (again) but they slink in to watch Robocop instead. Not cheating.

I once had to play a tournament match on Starcraft:Broodwar years ago and the player I was supposed to play against put Elky in his stead, is that cheating

Not cheating. You lost to Elky, not whatever player, but the rules of Starcraft were unbroken, I assume.

"It's not about what's right and wrong, it's about what the person perceives as right and wrong." Tell that to a judge.

"people used to get shot for ghosting? lmao" Believe me, there are plenty of humans out there that are willing to do horrible things to you when they find out you scammed them for huge sums. We're not talking about Jungle giving tips. It's that someone agreed to play a certain opponent for millions when he in reality never really played that guy. Is the difference between getting your coaches tips via skype while you're at a ft vs this scenario so hard to understand?


This thread can go on forever, but we should realize that we're merely the peasants who are enraged about a millionair cheater's behavior while all the ppl involved as well as their peers are fine with (by this time).
Perkins is back on his boat being coked up gettin pegged by his harem. Jungle practices acting in front of his mirror while getting a nice compensation for accepting his role as the public culprit. And sauce is sitting at home with a complacent smirk because ppl are still discussing if his assessment of jungles actions we're sarcasm or not.

Never knew Nicolas cage was a end boss, cool....

According to recent high profile legal precedent, a game that has set parameters needs the parameters to be fulfilled in order for the game to be considered "valid" - so what that means basically is the game is the owner of each account playing fairly and without assistant vs the owner of other accounts. If that's not the case then technically the game in void.

Not saying Jungle is a terrible person for doing what he's doing, just saying that i think it's hard to argue it's not cheating.

Agree, the guy who sold the account is the real scumbag, Jungle violated the rules of a club he wasn't technically a part off, the person who's obligatoin was to the follow the rules and didn't is the biggest culprit

I broke the rules just like anyone who played via VPN has.

than you are a cheater like anyone who cheated

All pros from USA are cheaters then /Thread

there are usa only sites, if they use vpn to illegally play where they shouldnt, yes they are cheating

The rules of play of poker hands themselves are not the only rules people agree to when they play online poker. Are you actually not aware of that? Perhaps not since you're not even sure if the rules of poker are actually written somewhere.

It's not at all just like he was able to sneak into a game. It's like he was able to play in a game because he disguised himself to look exactly like someone else when it is understood that representing yourself as someone else is not permissible. If it was just him somehow getting into the game but they could still tell who he really was, that would not be unethical.

I disagree. Right and wrong are objective (and can be discovered through the use of reason), and are not based upon what the majority think. Even if the majority of the population thought it was okay to steal, it would still be wrong. The majority is often wrong about things.

But is using a VPN to play malum prohibitum or malum in se? I mean the only reason sites ban Americans is because they don't want to get in trouble with the American government. But realistically I'd imagine most people on this site oppose the UIGEA, which is the reason why Americans are banned in the first place. Rules can exist which are wrong, or which have to exist because of an action or law that was wrong.

When high stakes recreational players ring fence themselves off from the general player population at public casinos and poker sites by changing/manipulating generally accepted rules regarding fair game access and waitlists, I don’t think it’s reasonable for them to expect their private games to be immune from attempted incursions by pros. If you expect to keep traditionally private games private, the other side of that equation is keeping traditionally public games public. It’s a bit silly to complain about bears showing up in your backyard after you cut down the forest. There are consequences to unilaterally manipulating an ecosystem. This is a pretty easily forseeable one.

Jungleman does make me laugh though, hes in a spot where he sort of has to apologise but deep down he's not sorry and fake sincerity really not his thing

I bet his thoughts on the topic are mostly, dam it getting caught, that was a bit stupid wasn't it.

Greed it boils down to , jungle has won 8 figures in poker but if you see a few hundred thousand easy money are you going to take it ???? it is hard to say no to it no matter how much you have made!

Thinking that there is an objective right and wrong about everything is an overly simplistic way of looking at the world, but it helps some people feel better about making sense of things, so have at it.

Even your example of stealing is overly simplistic. Even Ethics 100 students learn about dilemmas where stealing can be the ethically and morally correct choice.