Re: Further clarification
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just to clarify further: the guy with the hand still in play can tell the guy who folded but the guy who folded can't tell the guy still in play. That way there is no knowing that your K high flush is the nuts because the A was folded PF.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. No problem there, and live, no confusion there. Where the confusion begins is that there is no way of knowing exactly what is being discussed when the hand is played out online. I have no doubt that BK, Dcfr, NLS, and others on 2+2 do not cross the bounds of ethical discussion during play but, this being a public forum available to all who wish to read it, it is essential that it be clearly stated what is and is not ethical and acceptable discussion during the play of a hand if discussion during the play of a hand is to be discussed at all.

-Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you CHEATERS ever hear of one player per hand?

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
There have been threads posted in the past where regulars here who are friends have posted about IMing each other about a big fish or two making a high limit game very attractive, then jumping into the game together. I suspect stuff like this is more common than most would think.

[/ QUOTE ]

YES I agree with this completly and alraedy assumed these big 2+2 are cheating softly in this manner.
Mike

Re: PM me
 

You guys are such freakin babies. So if I'm playin 30/60 at canterbury and it's a fantastic game and I call up schneids and tell him to come down and get in the game, he comes down, we sit next to eachother and sweat eachothers hands that what we're doing is unnethical? B [censored] S. What we're doin is the same thing, it's just online and it's completely fine. Get over it.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
NONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS ARE OK!!!!!

not during the play of the hand. even if bk is at a different table and schnieds is in the process of playing a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are high. Trying to enforce some sort of "one player to a hand" rule online is beyond retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of coarse but admitting you are a cheat and being one looks very bad among your peers IMO
mike

Re: PM me
 

He's not a cheat, nor is he admitting to being a cheat.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
For the record Diablo I'm pretty sure I trust any read I have more than any read BK has, and I'm pretty sure he feels the same about his reads. Especially considering that opponent A may play a hand one way against me and another way against BK. Our IMming if we're on the same table is purely for recreational value, no different from conversing in a live game. I see your point about this being a concern online and I'm sure it happens from time to time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought you superstars were playing 10 games at once - Oh now your chatting for recreation value. This is very unnerving, wish I knew your ID's so I could stay away!
Mike

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]

I thought you superstars were playing 10 games at once - Oh now your chatting for recreation value. This is very unnerving, wish I knew your ID's so I could stay away!
Mike

[/ QUOTE ]

Wraaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I knew for a fact that two players at my table were on IM, I would not feel comfortable even if I thought they were honest people. It is unreasonable for anybody to say that they are actively corresponding with somebody at the same table, and expect everyone to be comfortable with the idea.

Also, in the unlikely event that Party security did pick up on this, I don't think that anybody involved would have the right to complain about their account being frozen.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely insane. At limits above 30/60 online, many of the players know each other personally. They know each other's aim. They know each other's phone #s. This is just a reality of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't want to berate the point because I know it is useless, and that there is a whole high-stakes subculture out there.

But that is what the chat window is for. That is why observer chat is allowed. You want to say high to a friend... open up his table and type in "Hi" for all to see.

No problem with that. IM, the other players can't see. Although this would not be enough to deter me from playing, IMO it is unreasonable to expect anyone to be comfortable with this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

WOW - yes the chat window is for chatting not IM. I have friends in these games too with the IM in their is no way we would be chatting to each other even about the weather!
Paluka I am not impressed, using IM instead of the chat box is like wispering to your friend in a BM during the hand. I don't care if it is about some broad it is very unethical!
Mike

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
Paluka I am not impressed, using IM instead of the chat box is like wispering to your friend in a BM during the hand. I don't care if it is about some broad it is very unethical!

[/ QUOTE ]

are you kidding? So if a friend and i are talking about what we did last weekend and we're sitting at the same table it's unethical?

Get a clue. This is unbelievable. You've lost all credibility in my eyes, and I'm sure I have in yours. It's ok though. Maybe we could get this settled over an AIM convo while playing on the same tables. That might settle it.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
He's not a cheat, nor is he admitting to being a cheat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said use the chat box - IM is very unethical.
Bike you are in a live game and in the middle of the hand you start wispering to each other about the weather. You don't think other players would find this unethical at the table?