Question about diplomacy

[konming]

My personal perspective on the matter is really no matter what the NAP stipulates if the breaker can outright win the game by breaking the NAP (in the case of VPs usually) then more power to them...

Personally I find all these instances of people taking out their frustrations on other people in OTHER games to be much much worse than someone breaking a NAP in the first place.

I don't know, this is what you were saying right? It's Ok to break a NAP if it leads to outright win (and by defination, no recourse in the same game), but it is not OK to remember that in another game. Ok, what happened to the "consequences" thing when the only "consequence" is not OK?

Also many of you stated disgust for a NAP breaker list idea. Well, if what I said was what you were saying all along, why do you object to a venue that people can list past NAP breaches so others can read the facts and make up their minds?

As for the facts, I personally think it is simple. When and how you break a NAP (like in this case, NAP is signed until a certain turn but he likes to terminate it early, anyone dispute that?) and why (he cannot let the other party just win). I wonder how else do you define facts in this case?

[LoloMo]

You can not have a public list of NAP breakers because whether a NAP is broken or not is subject to oppossing interpretations. Such a list would be bad for the community because of the abuse and conflict that it would generate. You can of course tell someone you play with privately what you think of the other players in your game.

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by LoloMo

You can not have a public list of NAP breakers because whether a NAP is broken or not is subject to oppossing interpretations. Such a list would be bad for the community because of the abuse and conflict that it would generate. You can of course tell someone you play with privately what you think of the other players in your game.

Your contention that its bad for the community is not supported by evidence. Ebay's seller rating is essentially the same thing - and last I checked they had a market capitalization rating in the billions of dollars. Seems to work for them.

Personally, I *don't* think facts should be given. No opinions nothing.

There should just be a list, maintained alphebetically, soemthing like this:

Violators name : Game : Reported By.

Grumpy FruitBat SnowWhite
Grumpy Pimpin' Caravaggio
Grumpy Veritas Joe DiMaggio
Heliotrop Standardds Grumpy
SunTzu KingMaker X the unknown.

No opinion, no verification. No arguments, no flames.
IF you wanted to get fancy, you could do the same thing for people that get caught cheating or using exploits.

Norbert KingMaker Hacking game files GlointheDark.
SlickWilly Veritas Bogus Violation JoeDimaggio

etc.