A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Just wondered where other people draw the line. Poker is a game of misinformation: it pays to convince your opponent you're weak when strong, and vice versa. Along those lines, I have no qualms about misleading an opponent. However, I never lie at a table, not even about folded hands (which almost everyone does). With that setup, here's my dilemma:
Dealt KK, flop set, turn quads. River 7, making K97K7. I make a weak bet, my HU opponent raises, I push. Opponent thinks a LONG time, says, "You don't have a king, do you?" I acknowlege that I don't, misleading (but not, I believe, lying.) If he had a crafty and devious mind, he'd realise I was telling him I had either 0 or 2 Ks.

When he calls (w/ 7s full) and I show, he's spitting mad. I calmly tell him (and am actually backed up by 2 other players) that I told him the literal truth. When I posted this at another site, the reaction ranged from "you're a jerk" to "he had no business asking; feel free to lie outright."

(Here's the OT part.) My school just introduced a policy whereby only water is allowed in the classrooms. This is hard on me with my many early classes and am currently drinking coffee and flouting the regs.

I figure that noone can conclusively tell what's in my spill-proof mug. But if asked, I need a way to mislead without outright lying. I feel responding "I'm drinking water" is a lie, even though coffee is 95% or more water. I think I'm telling the truth, however, if I respond "my mug contains water" (and hope they don't follow that up with "does it contain water EXCLUSIVELY?)"

Just curious where everyone draws the line.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Why do you care about lying, but not about directly breaking a school rule?

~MagicMan

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you care about lying, but not about directly breaking a school rule?

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]
Because the rule in question is a newly enacted and hugely unpopular effort to attempt to eliminate janitors' jobs, plus, with a spill-proof mug, how much damage am I really gonna do?

I'd be real surprized to see many profs pushing this one (eating a pizza in class might be different though.)

I also didn't particularly care about breaking 55 back in the day (and that's a LAW, not some silly school rule). I also don't lose sleep over playing internet poker, which is (depending on your read of the law) probably somewhat illegal, too.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

I'll lie to my grandmother at a poker table... i dont have a line that i've drawn yet

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Also, I think that caring about lying in a poker hand is silly. However, since you do seem to care, I believe that you are wrong when you think that answering "no" to his question is not a lie. He asked if you had a king, which you do. He didn't ask "Do you have exclusively one king?" Even if he said "Do you have a single king?" the answer would still be yes. Saying "no" is definitely lying, and you are kidding yourself if you think it's not. However, it doesn't make you a jerk.

~MagicMan

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

It is water with an energy suppliment dissolved in it.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

I totally respect your desire to undermine stupid school rules with technicalities. We need to think about what they will be asking, verbatim. Is it going to be "What's in your cup?"? In that case, I agree you can say "My cup contains water" without lying, but I think it will be quite obvious that you're being a smartass. However, you're also likely to be faced with "You know that you're only allowed to have water, right?" in which case you can truthfully answer "yes," and if they follow up "Is that water in there?" you can fairly truthfully answer "yes." I'm still debating on that last one.

~MagicMan

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

coffee is like 99% water. Just say you added something to make the flavor more enjoyable.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Is flavored water allowed? If so, your answer is easy. Almost everything is flavored water.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think that caring about lying in a poker hand is silly. However, since you do seem to care, I believe that you are wrong when you think that answering "no" to his question is not a lie. He asked if you had a king, which you do. He didn't ask "Do you have exclusively one king?" Even if he said "Do you have a single king?" the answer would still be yes. Saying "no" is definitely lying, and you are kidding yourself if you think it's not. However, it doesn't make you a jerk.

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a final thought on this...
Not to parrot Clinton's "It depends on what your defenition of 'is' is," but it all comes down to what opponent is saying by "a king."

I would consider "a" to be, essentially, a synonym for "one." If he said, "do you have one king?" (which he never would, of course) I obviously wouldn't be lying (at least not IMO.) The question is whether "a" is sufficiently different from "one" to change a misleading statement into an outright lie.

OTOH, if I had $2 and someone asked me, "do you have a dollar?"....it would depend on who was asking [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I'm not saying everyone has to agree with me, but I feel I'm on far firmer ground than when the ex Prez claimed that oral sex didn't qualify as "sexual relations."

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

[ QUOTE ]
When he calls (w/ 7s full) and I show, he's spitting mad. I calmly tell him (and am actually backed up by 2 other players) that I told him the literal truth. When I posted this at another site, the reaction ranged from "you're a jerk" to "he had no business asking; feel free to lie outright."

[/ QUOTE ]What did he expect you to do? Tell him your hand? He's mad because he lost and he wants to blame you for it. It's what humans do to soften large dissapointments.

But don't try to justify it to him. It is not necessary and it doesn't make you look good- not that you looking good to him is particualrly important anyway. But if what you are trying to achive is some logical explanation to abate an emotional response, you are doomed to failure. In fact, now you're just giving him a reasonable target. If you did anything that was jerk-like, it was after the hand when you tried to demonstrate how you tricked him by fancy wordplay and a technicality.

Who cares how you interpret the question? You are free to answer how you like (unless the rules where you are playing state that you are not aloud to tell an opponent your hand, which you did not do). Your goal is to get his chips in the middle, and that's what you did. Saying "no" to a straightfoward question about your hand is not angle shooting. If you thought it would get his chips in the middle, then it was a good poker play- nothing more, nothing less.

But seriously, get over the "lying about your cards" thing. It's a game, not a moral issue. Lying is not in my nature- just ask my wife. She gets so frustrated when I can't back up her stories of why we're late to family functions! But in poker I have no problem answering "72" when someone asks me what I have, or answering "yup" when asked if I have a set when I'm bluffing after villan folds. It's a strategic part of the game and not a moral issue at all.

My answer to that question would proably be "do I need one?"

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

There is no crying in Baseball and no lying in Poker. You can not lie in a game where the very nature of the rules require that you mislead your opponents. Therefore anything you "represent" in Poker is fair game. Whether asked or not.

However, in most other aspects of your life, when you "represent" the truth, you should be in fact telling it to the best of your understanding.

In other words, if asked a question, and you believe you fully understand the intent behind the question, you should answer it to the best of your knowledge with regard to that intent.

Or simply put, stop lying!

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

bcubed, do you go to Penn State? we just had the same no food policy made this year.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Regarding the coffee/water thing, if you get busted it doesn't mater how you intepret the rules. You might make a moral stand on what YOU think is right, but don't use fancy wordplay and a technicality to justify your actions. I'm certain you KNOW they will bust you for coffee, regardless of your spillproof mug and deep unterstanding of the real motivations behind the new rule.

If you get caught, you will pay the consequences. If it is worth it to you and you think your cause is just, then I guess you have your answer. But if/when you get caught, don't act suprised or try to justify yourself by a word technicality, because it won't work and no one will really care. If youre real issue is that you are attempting to fulfill the "spirit of the rule" by using a spillproof mug, well that's worth arguing, and while I'm certain you'll get nowhere, you can at least feel like you've taken a moral stand for something you believe in. But seriously, if you think you can justify it because Coffee is 90% water, you KNOW that's not what they meant so don't even go there.

Or to answer your real question, yes, misreprenting the truth is lying, even if you are telling a parital truth. In fact, the best lies are cloaked in half-truths.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Holy crap! Did I read that right?! You can only bring in water to class? That's crazy. When I was in college (about 6 years ago) you could not only drink whatever you wanted but you could eat pretty much whatever you wanted as well (within reason). This wouldn't surprise me so much in a high school setting, but college?! Wow.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

[ QUOTE ]
bcubed, do you go to Penn State? we just had the same no food policy made this year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Guilty as charged! Seriously, in another section of the 2+2 boards (I inquired as to how to locate a game) I said I was located "4-5 hours west of AC in an anonymous college town." NOONE picked up on it, or at least bothered to mention it.

The thing that really pissed me off re: the ban was the buisiness about giving away bottled water in exchange for signatures--like they can buy us off. Got bent out of shape a bit and ranted (letter to Collegian) where I basically said that they should do what the library does--approve any liquid (beer might be pushing it [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]) in a spill-proof container. Might be in a bit of trouble 'cause I basically said I'm gonna defy the ban.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Okay, first of all, when you are intentionally deceiving someone, then you are lying. Regaurdless of how you word it. PERIOD. However, poker is a highly physocological game, and lying is part of the game. You need to be doing whatever it takes to get as many chips in the pot as you can (with in the rules) when your holding a monster. If this means lying, then you lie. If you arent comfortable doing this then you need to quit poker and take up Go Fish or Uno or something. Thats poker. Outside of poker, no, you shouldnt lie.

Second of all, why are you making such a big deal out of taking coffee to class??????? If your gonna do it, then fine, do it. It doesnt sound like its that big of a deal. And like what others have already said, when you get caught then you must face the consequences because you KNEW that your "flavored water" was not allowed. Sounds to me like your just trying to find a way to justify it to yourself and not to whoever might ask you whats in the cup.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

You lie everytime you slowplay a hand or bluff. If you're not willing to do these things you won't get very far.

Why should a verbal lie be any worse than an unspoken one?

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Who would be stupid enough to listen exclusively to the words of the answer. The reason for asking isnt to hear your answer its to make you talk in order to give away the real answer.

I would lie if it benefits me in poker. Next time you can probably tell the truth and he would have no idea whether it is true or not, you put him on tilt, plus it stops him from asking questions that may force you to give away extra info from a tell.

Well played.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Lying about your hand is part of the game. Anyone who asks what I have and believes my answer is a fool.

One thing that a certain kind of good player does in live games is ask something like "You don't have a king, do you?" and look for tells, putting much less weight on whatever it is that you happen to say in response.

As far as the school thing goes, it's a dumb rule. If you are concerned about ethics, you can abide by the rule and do something like take No-Doz or chew on caffeinated mints while drinking water. Civil disobedience is also an ethical option.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

[ QUOTE ]
... Civil disobedience is also an ethical option.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a total bean head, I agree with the civil disobedience option. I can't imagine many tenured profs being bothered to enforce such a ridiculous rule but some tight arsed TAs just might.

What's the penalty for this crime? If it's a fine, I would just go on bringing coffee and consider, if caught, I was paying slightly more then Starbuck's prices if the penalty is not too draconian. I can envision that anyone so uptight to ask what is in the cup might ask to see it and we all hate to have our bluffs called if there's no +EV so, I wouldn't lie.

I dealt with this kind of thing while working on a ship. We had crew boat drill at 9:30 am for an hour and my station was in some back stairway where I'd be there to help passnegers in case of crisis. For the drill, we just stood there in our lifejackets. I'd bootleg the mug when officers came by (Vry rare occurance) but after two months, my bandleader who shared the station with me asked about the mug. He got kinda pissed when I told him it was coffee but I'd have hurt the relationship more by lying.

Lying about the Kings should be second nature. Either the other player can read you or not. It's what we do. ;~)

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

The way I see it, poker is a game of paying. I pay to see the flop, turn, and river. The river payment gives me the right to see the bettor's cards and they paid for the right to see my cards. Why should anyone get special priviliges when the rules are defined so well?

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

I think, loking back, that the response to opponent's question ("Do you have a king?") was only the icing on the cake; that he had 90% made up his mind proir to this. When I flopped top set on a non-threatening board(K97 rainbow), I check/called a modest bet. When the 4th king came on the turn, I knew that if I check/called the turn, too, then led out on the river, it would look like an obvious slowplay. So I figured I needed to bet out here, but I knew my opponents were probably fairly weak, so I thought a 1/2 to 2/3 pot bet would look about right. I got called by 2 players. On the river, (K97K7), I made another 1/2 pot bet, and when one opponent (unexpectedly) raised me, I decided to see if I could bust him. When I went all-in, he knew one K was much more likely than two, so he must have been weighing the hand history to see if it made sense with a K in the hole, which I think is what compelled his call. If I had, say, AK, check/calling TPTK on the flop and betting out trips on the turn seems unlikely; most people would lead out the flop and slowplay the turn. I really think the weak bet on the turn was key; I don't think a relatively weak hand of 7s full on that board is going broke unless I bet there to set up the river.

Well, my slighty OT post seems to be headed well OT, to the point where I soon expect this thread moved to some forum I could never find. But let me comment on the whole "coffee controversy," and I'll do it in terms of odds against something happening, to make it at least look somewhat poker-related.

For me to get in trouble, all of the following need to happen:
First, the classroom ban applies (I think) to profs as well, so probably many of them are suffering in silence. And, unless there is administration pressure behind the ban that has been well hidden, to get in trouble I need a prof who is sufficiently "gung-ho" about the ban to interrupt his class to pester me. Figure (generously) 5:1 against here.

Next, after I give him my not-a-lie-but-delibertely-evasive-answer of "my mug contains water," most profs are going to feel that they've fulfilled their obligation, whether or not they truly believe me. I'd have to run into a prof willing to interrupt his teaching and lose classtime in order to physically verify the contents of my mug. I figure 8:1 against here.

Next, the prof would need to be motivated enough to report me for disciplinary action. This is more likely, because if he did the first two steps, he's probably pissed at me. Figure even money.

Then, what happens next? It's not like I'm selling crack or (even worse) plagarizing. For a first offense, I wouldn't expect much more than a stern warning, although since I've publicly stated I'm gonna defy the ban, maybe they'd try to make an example of me. The fact that so much energy has been spent on PR and winning "hearts and minds" suggests that they realize the only way to effect a change is via voluntary compliance; that they can't exactly rule with an iron fist on this one.

Finally, what would be the worst case scenario, if I continue to publicly defy the ban and keep getting caught? If they ever kicked me out, I'd probably be the first person kicked out of a Big Ten school for drinking coffee in 50 years (I mean, it's not like we're Mormons or something.) This would be newsworthy at least throughout the Big Ten, and probably further. I'm so sure the school would not want the publicity that this would be an easily callable bluff.

A final word on is "my mug contains water" a lie or not:
Consider if, instead of drinking coffee, I'm nursing a monster hangover by drinking beer. An astute prof sees I'm half in the bag and challenges me by saying, "does that mug contain alcohol?" I think I'd be forced to lie here, as I don't think there's any way I could honestly deny that a mug of beer "contains alcohol."

So, to be consistent, if a mug of a liquid that's only 5% alcohol "contains alcohol," then surely a mug that's in excess of 95% water could be said to "contain water."

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Ive always been told that its not lying in poker its strategizing.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

If you were going to a University instead of a College, I would say that you should get an immediate refund for your "education", since they have obviously failed.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

If you're concerned with ethics and right and wrong, not getting off on technicalities, here are your choices:
A) Don't bring anything other water to class.
B) Bring something other than water and pay the consequences (which is probably just having to dump it out) when caught.

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

Good first question (poker one), ridiculous 2nd question (coffee one).

Ok. I won't be so harsh. I actually think that you asked the coffee question not so much because you worry about what to do in school, but rather because you see it as an interesting situation and thinking about it is like philosophy.

Regarding the first question, no one expects anyone to tell "the truth" at the table. If that was the case, then we might as well play with the cards face up.

For the coffee situation, I would just be a pimp. No one is going to tell me what I can or can't drink. I would just take my coffee. If I ever get asked about it, the situation would go something like this:

Teacher : What is that drink that you have there sonny?
Me : My coffee.
Teacher : You can't have coffee here boy.
Me : Who has coffee? I have water.
Teacher : But you just said you have coffee.
Me : This is water and I don't see why we should make a big deal out of this.
Teacher : That's it. Go to the principal's office.

Principal : Boy, why do you have coffee in class?
Me : Sir, I don't have coffee. I just have dark water. And as long as it doesn't interfere with the class, I think we should forget this incident about my water. All I want is to be in class.

Principal : O.k. kid. You are a good guy. Just keep bringing you "water" in a dark container.


Principal to teacher : The kid is only going to bring water just like today.

Teacher to principal : But that wasnt water, it was coffee.

Principal to teacher : It's only coffee if we want it to be coffee. Have a nice day.

Colima 420

Re: A question of ethics (slightly OT)
 

why lie, just ignore the person asking the question