[Gandalf Parker]

Usually the best Non-Aggression Pacts have an out clause. Something like "dont attack for 5 turns" or "allied with a 3 turn notification before aggression". I would think that there is a difference between properly breaking a NAP vs using one to get someone to empty their border so you can rush in and attack (which I would consider to be backstabbing). The problem is that we just hear continual back and forth about the two sides of the story, or people saying the game should be played that way anyway. And the purpose of such a list rings false. It comes off more as a whine. The person posting might THINK its a service.

But if someone is that concerned about someone you have an agreement with then there is usually a thread here in the forum and the person you are wondering about has posted. Just click on their name to get a nice menu of options including "Find all Posts by" which can be much more informative than someone posting their name to a list. Check and see if arguments have popped up in other games and why. Sometimes you can learn that its a simple counting error. To quote a line from many movies.. "WAIT. Do we go on 3? or is it 1,2,3 then go?" Knowing thatcan go a long way to avoiding problems.