On the facts as we know them, which do you consider is the most reprehensible?
The Ben Warrington situation.
The Brian Hastings situation.
And why?
I almost don't consider them in the same bracket, r.e hastings; its gambling he's breaking some rules to give himself an advantage, one side could argue that this is the job of a pro gambler - sneaking out edges wherever they are.
Obviously it's unethical, but others who are pro gamblers should be on the look out to protect themselves from this.
R.e Ben this isnt finding a edge, this is saying "il do this for $X and not doing it" that goes against all principles.
I know some guys who would MA, collude, angle anything to get an edge in gambling, but if they ever say they will pay $x or do Y then they always do...
All's fair on the felt but your word should be your word.