Prior research has extensively studied workplace group dynamics within the gossip triad (i.e., sender, receiver, and target). This research shifts the focus to third-party observers outside the gossip triad, examining how they evaluate gossipers and non-gossipers, and whom they turn to for advice. Across five pre-registered experiments (N = 1400), the present work builds on an integrative definition of gossip and provides a functionalist account of observers' nuanced evaluation of gossipers' personality from a global perspective. Observers perceive gossipers as less moral and competent, but more sociable, than non-gossipers (Experiment 1). Consequently, observers are less likely to seek advice from gossipers (vs. non-gossipers) for tasks requiring high morality (e.g., enforcing ethical conduct; Experiment 2a) and high competence (e.g., managing excess inventory; Experiment 2b), yet more likely to do so for tasks requiring high sociability (e.g., organizing a welcome lunch; Experiment 2c). A moderation-of-process approach shows that incidental cues signaling morality, competence, and sociability influence observers' evaluations of and advice-seeking from gossipers (versus non-gossipers) on relevant tasks (Experiments 2a–2c). These findings remain robust in an incentive-compatible setting (Experiment 3). This research advances our understanding of observers' evaluation of gossipers and its implications for workplace advice seeking.