Is this a dirty/back-door/unethical tactic?
It's a bit dirty, but I wouldn't call it unethical.
So I believe the OP is being disingenuous with this question. One way this thread could possibly affect the OP's behavior is by getting him to do something he himself deems unethical. I have no wish to help that. The other way is that he could behave in a way more restricted than his ethical boundaries would allow, and he wants to know exactly how far he can go without crossing the line. If that's his tack, I have no wish to give information helping him there, I'd rather force simulators of scruples to have to play it extra safe. Or maybe two people are in a disagreement and they decided to resolve things by posting a thread here. In which case I'd say going by majority decision is a poor way to resolve ethical problems. People should have their own sense of ethics.
People make mistakes, some people are cautious enough to ask others for input before trying something to see if their own justification is reasonable. I see no problem with that.
Speaking for myself: I have a strong innate moral sense that kicks in automatically to make me feel good or bad about certain actions. So, my brain puts in some effort and constructs a model of how to act in order to maximize the good and minimize the bad feelings.
Like most (all?) models, this model can be generalized -- applied to inputs other than those that informed its construction. The strange thing is, once my brain has made such a model, I will then feel bad about doing anything that it says I should feel bad about -- even if I wouldn't have cared before I made the model.
Sometimes I feel conflicted -- this is either because it is unclear how to apply my model to a situation or because my innate moral sense pops up and contradicts my model. The only thing to do then (if I am to avoid the path of ignoring and trying not to think about it) is to refine my model to account for the new situation or new innate "moral data".
This can require some serious thinking. Sometimes it helps to consult with other people who have already done some thinking along similar lines. It is like when physicists consult with each other because they are not sure how to apply their model in a particular situation, or because an experiment contradicts their model.