If Pool X displays they are a BTC pool, then I can submit shares to that pool for BTC. However if that pool *doesn't* display that they are merged mining, that means Pool X Op is taking the shares I paid for (with electricity) and secretly profiting.
You're right. I would consider that unfair, under some circumstances. However both circumstances a still unethical (advertising)
If I saw no purpose to owning an alternative coin, yet they could get those coins as a side-effect of me looking for BTC, and the pool did not advertise this, they can have the shit that I produce, so to speak. - This is a fair scenario. Unethical advertisement practices however
If however, for any reason I thought it might be worth just keeping the alternative coins (e.g. for some crazy reason other people want alternative coins, you have them. use/sell them. ), yet the pool I was mining at didn't advertise they were keeping the coins I found as a side-effect of looking for BTC, I WOULD BE MAD - unfair, unethical
If you would discard all but certain outputs from your inputs, why be so greedy to not let others take which you do not want?
Meaning, from your input of hashing power, you only want BTC and would discard any other coins. Why be so greedy to not let others have the alternative coins you would discard?
You may have to be brutally honest about your perception of alternative coins values. Are they really worthless? Worth discarding? If they exist and other people want them, perhaps I want them just to sell/use them?
But yes I have not challenged the idea that its unethical advertisement/operations however you put it.
Unfair, to me, in this circumstance is different.
Thinking really critically, if I wanted the alternative coins just for the purpose of discarding/deleting them, and the pool I mined at did not advertise I was also hashing for these alternative coins, it would be unfair. But is it? The only reason I want them is to discard them?