[indianaV8]

I don't know if I'm stepping on someone too, but you need to make your claims more clear, is it that
1) botting is criminal
2) botting is cheating defined by "breaking a service agreement"
3) botting is cheating defined by "breaking a common denominator moral"
etc.

1 is obviously not the case.

W.r.t. 3):
If you like, you may have a look at how Darse Billing, the FullTilt advisor or employee (that is information I got in the 2+2 poker theory forums, I don't know it is true for sure) is talking about poker botting. What is for sure is that a long term poker bot researcher (Aaron Davidson, the author of poki) is now working FullTilt software too. But back to Darse, and what he is writting (just in the last one week):

[ QUOTE ]
In general, it is not a good idea to stay too far from the real game. The academic research should stay grounded in real problems. For the same reason, i suggest moving away from Doyle's game and on to the real NL game with varying stack sizes. <...> Finally, perhaps we should start a discussion of what [poker bot] events should be added in future years. <...>

[/ QUOTE ]

He (and the other "cheaters") are talking about what the rules of the 2008 poker bot scientific competition should be.

Hence only 2) remains, which you already ruled out.