I think it's better if experienced players don't do stuff like this when playing against juniors or improving players.  This is mainly because of my own experience of something similar.   

When I first went to a club at 18, I played a few games with the weaker members and was considered "promising".  Then I played one of the club's stronger players.  I was aware of the "good" openings from reading BCM for years, but I'd never had much opportunity to play against decent opposition.  I was excited to finally get the chance to play some of these positions.  First game, I tried playing the Ruy Lopez, and he played the Schliemann.  Next time I had white, I tried d4/c4 instead, and he played the Budapest.  Both times I went down in 15 moves without much idea of what was going on.  As far as I'm aware, he didn't play either of those as part of his regular repertoire.  After being shocked like that, I stuck to the London System for the next 5 years because nobody ever did wacky things there as black.  To this day, I don't know how much that set me back as a player.

I think it's very easy for Novice players to be intimidated by opening theory and think they have to memorize huge amounts of stuff to avoid all these dubious openings.  The way to get them out of that habit, I think, isn't to play the rubbish against them until they get over it.  That had the absolute opposite effect on me.  It's better to play mainline openings against them, so that they don't fear the opening, learn that they can make good moves without knowing theory, and don't blame their mistakes and losses on opening surprises.  Then, when they're more experienced, they're better equipped to deal with the wacky stuff.

I'm not sure what the guy's motivation was for playing those openings against me.  Maybe he wanted to expose me to the wacky stuff so I'd be ready for it in a match, but I suspect some players just can't resist the opportunity to pull off some cheap trick against a naive opponent, and that helps nobody.

Am I corrupting young minds? 

At the club the other night I was volunteered for a 10-minute game against a young lad. I ended up with black. Usually I would aim for 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nxe4?!, but in this case he played 2.Bc4. I thought for a few seconds and played a la Calabrese 2...f5?!, whereupon 3.f3? fxe4 4.fxe4? Qh4+ 5.g3?? got him toasted pretty quick. Afterwards I explained that 2...f5 was a bad move, and showed him some basic traps in lines with 2/3...f5, and also explained that simple development with d2-d3, Nb1-c3 would be very good. Then I found an adult to play blitz against.

Okay, a little while later I looked over at his game against another junior, and he had the following position as BLACK:

 
Naturally he got burned after 5...Nf6 6.Ng5.

Now I'm feeling a little guilty about what I did to him, and I'm wondering what I should do next time... Since I can win with just about any opening, would it be better to play ultra-classical Giuocos and Two Knights and Berlins as black and save the trashy gambits for the adult guppies? These kids know that I'm the strongest regular at the club (there's another adult who never shuts up about it), and I have to remember that they're very impressionable.