[nate1729]

This is a bizarre remedy for that particular broken rule. The rule exists to keep a player from divulging information unequally, but it is meant to apply on a time-frame of an entire session (or longer,) not during a hand. That is, exposing the hand after the action was completed would have been an equally potent remedy for the breaking of that rule.

Now, another rule was broken, namely the one that says a live hand can't be intentionally exposed (details of this rule are technical and vary from room to room.) That rule, by contrast, has impact within the course of a single hand. So it makes sense to punish Seat 5 somehow. Sometimes this is a warning, sometimes this is a dead hand. Personally, I think that a warning is a fine punishment in this case, because nobody else can act, and Seat 6 can only gain information. (If Seat 4 could have still acted... sheesh, I guess exposing Seat 5's hand or maybe killing it is the right answer.)

Anyway, punishment was possibly appropriate according to the letter of the law... just not the "show one, show all" law.

--Nate