People refer to the internet as the last wilderness. It has become the dominant mode of information, communication, and commerce. It has yet to become fully regulated, domesticated or taxed. Somehow, people feel freer online and will express themselves differently than in a similar live setting. There are certain societal behaviors that aren't acceptable live but online they are frequent. People falsely feel there aren't reprecussions for their actions online. You see this at the online poker tables where people show little courtesy or etiquette. If they tried to pull that stuff live, they would either be escorted from the casino or face bodily harm.
I wanted to share some thoughts to foster a healthy debate in regards to morals, ethics and regulations in online poker situations. The main object for debate is the classic poker rule - one player, one hand. Live, it is very clear that in a tournament or cash game, no one is to influence your decision at the table. You are not to receive assistance, advice or prompting. You are certainly not allowed to have someone else finish your tournament for you. Somehow all these lines get blurred online. You don't see your opponent, only a username. You know little about your opponents other than their statistics or tendencies. You may have a history of playing them before that you factor in. Your opponent may be playing multiple tables or tournaments.
The question becomes where do we draw the line of one player, one hand. If a player is having a private lesson, and a coach is sitting over his shoulder or on the phone lending advice is that appropriate? What about 'ghosting'? If a team of players are playing one account, should they inform their opponents? Is it okay to play a tournament, get deep, then 'sell' your seat for a more seasoned player to finish when you get close to the big money?
Where are the appropriate lines to be drawn? With the multi accounting, super-user, and ghosting scandals of the past, the burden has been on the poker sites to crack down and draw the line on what is permissable. That line has shifted over time. The playing sites need to be very clear and consistent and vigorous in their enforcement.
I have argued in the past, that if poker is ever to become more mainstream and accepted in society, that it needs to be as open and even handed as possible. Every whiff or report of underhanded play hurts us all from having poker taken seriously by the legislative bodies around the world. It scares newer players and their money from joining the game.
The winds of change are very slowly arriving for a more permissive environment for online poker. It may still be years before we reach an openly regulated, taxed and legal environment. But to speed that process, I think we are benefitted by having healthy discussions regarding some of the fundamental understandings of our game.
Everyone should play by the same set of rules, or you run the risk that the loose interpretations of one player, one hand, be used against you to your detriment.
Everyone says, but the internet is different, but is it really? Are we as people different because we play online instead of live? Do you have relativistic morality and ethics? Wherever you go, it changes? Is it fair if it gives you an advantage, but unfair when used against you, harming your results? I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
