ethics only exist to help the human race survive. im sure other species find humans to be extremely unethical from their perspective. if anything there are too many humans and our growing population is actually a threat to our long term survival. so decreasing a problem gambler's chance of breeding is very ethical while donating to charity to help ppl is unethical.

Should i donate to 9/11 victims or reg next time?

Maybe Charity Poker tournaments should be the only game allowed. That way you're only playing for chips, not money, and it helps somebody so whatever is causing the guilty conscience will be salved. Plus you can win useful items like a toaster oven or ice skates or even a bicycle.

have you considered starting a thread on the GA forums to see if any of them have considered the dark side of wasting their money instead of donating it?

I've been out working for a few hours making an ethical living. Had a similar thought when out to above.

My step dad is 75, he's had a good innings, but also 2 heart valve replacement operations. His ticker works fine now.... but I mean next time he needs a heart op should I send him the numbers on how many mosquito nets could be bought for the cost of his operation. Because it would certainly be effective giving.

One, well one quarter of a life lost for ~1500 saved. I'll suggest it to him, could be a hard sell.

That could have been your first good post ever if you weren't being sarcastic

But instead you should be telling him that you're giving the money to gamblers anon. You're basically taking others peoples lives and giving them to your step dad because he's more important to you

Selfish

I'm with OP.

In fact I think I'd take the 9/11 analogy even further.

If you play a hand of poker you are basically the same as a terrorist hijacker and by not donating every cent if you win a hand you are basically taking a dump on ground zero.

Yes it was sarcastic but not inconceivable that these conversations are going on somewhere among intellectuals.

However, it's a potential slippery slope, a possible gateway to eugenics. I mean if it was known that his family had a history of heart problems then why let him be born in the first place, and bam you've got yourself another 3000 mosquito nets. Top of the net!

That's 4500 nets in total. Can I have my REG badge yet?

I still feel bad for "Jaws" in "Moonraker", so sad.

So, regarding your pledge of only writing 100 words or less per post until the end of next year, a few quick questions about the ground-rules.

Does '100%' not count as a word at all?

Does 'him/her' and 'his/her' only count as one word each?

Does 'I've' only count as one word?

Just asking...

out of curiosity what's the difference if you change 'mosquito nets' with gamblers anon? And what am I supposed to to tell the disabled vets I used to donate to since you say I should be donating to gambling addicts?

I covered some of my thoughts re: gamblers anon (similar charities) earlier ITT, saying it redresses some direct harm caused. Also suggested why not REG do both types of donation?

Disabled vets is a great cause, max respect to you for this. If you are making significant money from poker then maybe yes a little also going to the bad effects of poker type charities could be a nice thing to do.

Also you have not been broadcast boasting about your donations.

With REG if I join up make $6M in year 1, donate $180K then live the high life, run super bad at poker, get divorced, pay alimony, hit the craps tables and go busto, can I ask for $90K back to grind with?

Good point but I'm going by Apache OpenOffice's word count.

So, as you are side-stepping my questions, I'll ask another.

Did you actually post more than 100 words or not, irrespective of some word count you are using?

Word count broke now?

Maybe it will be ok if you donate say 20% of your words to charity so that they don't count any more?

Beat me to it. Many of SageDonkey's hot takes are just thinly veiled expressions of resentment toward the poker community and industry. He has stated before that he's a losing player, but has some delusions about why.

Sage, your OP is the literal definition of begging the question, or assuming the initial point. You have casually taken this premise that poker is a pox on society, and couched it into a discussion on a different topic, as if we all take the premise for granted.

Welcome back though.

Held for comment forthcoming.

Thanks for the welcome back, break even/tiny loser actually.
(Dispute delusions, was very open/honest about it)

I support poker and gambling as there is a clear demand for it.

This is purely the conflict issue of money earned through not totally ethical means given to charity.

Indeed I have previously made the same points direct to Dan Smith on Twitter and separately to Liv Boeree on Twitter. Dan politely disagreed on all of my points, Liv politely disagreed on the vast majority of the points but acknowledged to some extent the sources of revenue where is the line point.

Was this thread OP's way of asking us for his money back?

This

Aside from the flawed premise that "profiting from poker is evil", what do profiting and donating the profits have to do with each other? Are you saying that they shouldn't donate poker winnings, or that charities shouldn't accept them, or that they should give it all back to the losers so there are no winners and losers, or are u saying capitalism needs them to spend it on consumer products?

I mean, you realize people are gonna play poker for money. But none of the profits should end up in charities? I wish I could believe you were trolling.

Dan Smith has gone up in my estimation for even answering your questions.

I respect yours an everybody's POVs. You may not know but I am only allowed 100 words per post! #truestory

But I have responded to the overall points you make in my previous posts.

I don't think poker is evil but I do think there is an ethical line somewhere regarding a conflict between how money is earned and it being given to charity, and so do some charities.

Sadly, he does not appear to be trolling, we just have no clue as to the true quality of his posts..... I mean, he got awards for his posts in the UK after all; maybe he's just on a higher plain of consciousness than most of us ?

SD, be aware that in the Kingdom of the Blind, the one-eyed man gets sharp stick therapy.

Personally, I plan on likely donating to needy poker players at the Green Valley Ranch's 1-2 tonight. What they do with their wins is up to them.

Yes he was very cool and so was Liv Boeree.

fyp

Good night - and don't worry, I won't be counting any more of your posts, as your ignore count has just increased by one.

Of course there is and its actually a very simple concept to grasp, not surprising poker pros are struggling with it. A non-forum forum full of semi-intelligent people with solid moral compasses wouldn't struggle at all but here we are #pokerforum

Bizarre to watch SD making so many solid points and so many supposed smart people fall over themselves to deride him. Oh look the "u must be losing player" retort. Regular as clockwork :eyeroll:

HOW you make your money matters. Everything trickles down from that.

I over simplified it ^ prob won't help much tho