On Ghosting

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I see nothing wrong with ghosting, and can't see myself ever being convinced otherwise

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Say someone stakes 20 neutral EV players in a tourney and when they get far he ghosts them. You guys have no problem with this?

[Bakes]

I think its fine as long as the ghoster doesn't have a financial interest in the horse, if it meant no ghosting and no multiaccounting / JJprod super sweats I would give it up in a heartbeat.

[NHFunkii]

HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR

[/ QUOTE ]
seriously, is "ghosting" "sweating and giving advice" or "taking over when the big money is on the line"?

[Bakes]

the former

[EC10]

if its the former, its fine. if its the latter, its not fine at all. but there's really no way to stop it, so there's nothing we can do about it.

[KneeCo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR

[/ QUOTE ]
seriously, is "ghosting" "sweating and giving advice" or "taking over when the big money is on the line"?

[/ QUOTE ]

What in the OP or any of the replies possibly indicates it could be the latter??

[Soulman]

From what ansky is saying, ghosting = sweating and giving advice without any financial interest in the sweatee.

Gets a bit more murky if a backer sweats/coaches his backee though imo.

[Exitonly]

OP didnt mention financial interest, and that doesnt really make a difference IMO.

i.e. if a staker was on the phone with one of the guys he backs while the backee wins a tournament, i think it's fine

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR

[/ QUOTE ]
seriously, is "ghosting" "sweating and giving advice" or "taking over when the big money is on the line"?

[/ QUOTE ]

What in the OP or any of the replies possibly indicates it could be the latter??

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, considering it's KIND OF A BIG DEAL RIGHT NOW, I think it's totally fair to assume that it fits in the discussion-- especially if we're trying to define what's ethical and what isn't, we have a reference point for "clearly isn't".