This is a very interesting discussion! I'd like to add my two cents
After reading the whole thread, I've noticed a number of people on the 'no breaking NAP' side seem to be angry. Read their posts again. I see a lot of serious and emotive language being used, and an overarching implication that anybody who breaks NAP's in game is an inherently bad person in real life.
I don't see this anger from the 'break NAP ok' side.
I'd rather not get angry over a game, it seems to defeat the purpose, and is definitely negative for me as a person. Such a waste of energy!
An early contributor to this thread stated that 'no breaking NAP's' was this community's standard. The following discussion proves this to clearly not be the case!
The community seems to hold a range of views on the topic, so in the absence of a clear view "backstab possible" must logically be the default stance on this topic.
The suggestion to specify whether NAP's are 100% binding before the start of the game seems very sensible and should end the debate. "Backstab possible" can be the default, "backstab not possible" can be specified before the game is started.
I believe it is incumbent upon people wanting NAPs to be binding to start their own games with this rule (which btw would be a much more effective solution than trying to get unbreakable NAPs coded into the game!)
Any further debate represents a desire by the 'no break' side to impose their will on the entire gaming community. You may be in the moral right, who knows, but don't waste your time guys, it's never going to happen!
The 'break ok' side have raised no concerns with people starting 'no break' games, so the solution is clear. (I reckon)
P.S. I wouldn't break an NAP unless the game was about to be lost (reputation is important!), but I feel the default should be 'break NAP ok', so I have sympathies for both sides!