Quite frankly, I find this unacceptable. How one chooses to conduct one's negotiations is their business. The league should not, in my opinion, make decisions regarding what diplomatic tactics are used, especially after the leagues have started.

I realize I may be in the minority here, so if the rest of the participants accept, I will also, but I wanted to at least say my piece.

Basically, I do not want to see flaming and the like involved in the leagues. They are here for people's enjoyment, remember, and there is no need to stop that occuring by allowing hate to result. I have already said that I shall allow press to be abraisive, but not excessively so. This is for fun, and there comes a point where there is no need for certain language, and the use of it destroys the fun. I shall be deliberately light with this matter, but there will be a point where enough is enough. The leagues should be know for good play, not ill manners.

Upon reading that, I realized that seemed a bit harsh. Let me rephrase this:

I think it's unnecessary to enact new rules because one person has a complaint, especially when a majority of other players don't have an issue.

I have a serious conern that you are going to be inundated with complaints about player's conduct. Some of this may be legitimate, but most of it will be whining. And, although I'm usually very civil (or at least try to be) I don't like the idea of someone potentially reporting my diplomacy techniques to a higher power.

This is possibly my fault. I never meant to drop anyone in it. My concern was that over-competitiveness was causing a bad atmosphere in the leagues. My rather florid forum post seems to have started a war. It appears that the situation was limited to myself and my neighbours, for which I must take my share of the responsibility.

This being said it never hurts to be polite and invective tends to leave a mark. Therefore I support Ghostmaker's post. The internet is largely self-regulating and if no-one in the world made an effort to be more civilized then we'd still be like the primates at the start of 2001.

I'd have to agree with abgemacht on all points.

I don't think it's okay to limit or restrict after the fact a viable, albeit it offensive, diplomatic tactic solely for the Leagues while no such verbal restriction is in place for phpdip in general.

I don't agree with using profane language, but I don't see a good reason to restrict its use.

I am not expecting this to be used, it is there for two reasons. The first is that if sombody really is being offensive for the sake of it, it means it is legitimate to remove them from the leagues, which is good and proper in my opinion. The second is so that a complaint, such as Polar Bear's, might be dealt with in a tidier, less obtrusive and less devisive way. Continue to play as you would otherwise. So long as you do not offend for the sake of offense, nothing shall be done. And if you do cross the line in my opinion, I shall be taking a very much "softly, softly" approach.

I am not in the league and generally do not use profanity, but it has its place and should not be restricted. It IS a tactic and the league admin should not be in the business of censorship. If Kestas wants to, thats different, its his site. Besides, the admin doesnt have access to press anyway,; does he??

No, but if somebody complains, then I can have it.

i agree with ghost. this rule is only to prevent abusive behavior. if the original post was addressed to him, everything would be ok. i'm sure he won't look at just a single game when deciding about a possible action

You wont get it from Kestas will you? Youll get an editale version? And you are the sole arbiter of what is offensive?

he's the organizer of the leagues. you're not participating, why should it matter to you?

if language is such an issue, why not create a game set-up rating *rated G*, where people who don't want to be exposed to bad language can opt in, rather than force the rest of us to opt out?

I'm not Canadian either, doesn't mean I cant watch hockey. Is it an issue for you if I make input or comment about the league?

I will discuss it with Chris and Flashy as well. It will be a matter of straightforward honour not to edit the transcripts. I should ask for print screens of it, since, whilst forgable, they will much harder to do.

"if language is such an issue, why not create a game set-up rating *rated G*, where people who don't want to be exposed to bad language can opt in, rather than force the rest of us to opt out?"

We are talking about a league here, not just general games... There are other things that you must abide by as well.

Wugdiet: You aren't in the league. You aren't being forced to opt-out. Those in the leagues have "opted-in" to whatever Ghostmaker's format is.

Dingleberry: You are of course entitled to your opinion. However, the fact that the league is voluntarily organised by the ghostmaker makes it perfectly fine for him to impose restrictions. Just as its fine for Kestas as its his site (as you say), its fine for ghostmaker as its his league.

Basically, this is completely toothless legislation and is only for extremes. No need to get worked up over it. I feel the important part is agreements will be handles by the organiser and not left to the chaos of the forums.

As a tool to be used in extreme cases, such as when one cannot bear to soldier on in the face of unrelenting abuse, I think that it will be effective.

It's more work for TheGhostmaker though, so do try to suck it up.

This site is about Diplomacy. There is no need to use profane language that may cause offence, for that is exactly what it will do.

Frankly, swearing is unimaginative. If you can't get your message across without swearing, then you aren't a very good diplomat. Yes, there is a place for 'chainsaw' diplomacy, but not with swearing.

whats wrong with swearing? In diplomacy anything goes, no? (maybe death threats might cross the line!)...if I can rile you with a few meaningless soundbites then that is your weakness....I should take advantage of it :)

I don't really understand why we need anything like Ghost's suggestion in the League if we dont need it in normal games. Why is it different?....Anyhow, there is nothing in MP's transcripts that comes anywhere close to being unacceptably offensive (IMHO)

Ghost, you put the hard work in to set this up but I really dont want you reading any of my conversations (other than with you :) )

There is a difference between "a few meaningless soundbites" and what is just genuine nastiness. In the transcripts published there was nothing that crossed the line in my view. The fact that you use the phase "unacceptably offensive" is the justification behind this. There does come a point where it is unacceptable, and I want a proper way of dealing with it, privately.

I understand the sensitivity why I am in the league, and will clearly not be reading any transcripts.

I dont disagree but, so why is this different to normal games?

I also think that it is kind of implying that MP did something to prompt this change in regulations which he didnt. Crybaby PolarBear did (boohoo)...

I would have a moderator for any game.

I have no problem with penalties for extreme cases, but swearing in general is not / should not be an offense. If someone stabs me and takes me out of a game I am completely within my rights to call the player an f-ing jackass or whatever.

...of course when you do it to him/her its a totally different story :)

I find using Chainsaw Diplomacy perfectly valid (see http://www.diplom.org/Zine/W1998A/Windsor/Chainsaw.html). Sometimes you want your opponent to think that you're angry, crazy or whatever. (WRITE ALL IN CAPS!!!!!!!!)
Should Ghostmaker receive a complaint I assume he'll contact you about it, at which point you can tell him your diplomatic reasons.

I don't think profanity should be prohibited. I don't think that it should be used, or that it will ever do anything a more expanded vocabulary could for your diplomatic game, but in the small chance that it does it should be allowed.

If you have issues with swearing in your game, I would prefer if you kept the punishment in-game. >=)

No public naming or shaming, just a good old fashioned trouncing.

I think the difference is the league is that the player faces the prospect of 4 more games with that person. I think that changes things somewhat.

Good point Centurian, which I hadn't considered. However, I find the idea of someone revealing my private conversations much more annoying than any profanity or rudeness.

Having said that, Diplomacy is the art of negotiating in such a way that it doesn't annoy. In that respect I feel swearing or rudeness is just counter productive. The fact is, it makes you less likely to get your way in game and therefore probably needs no higher intervention.

Part of the challenge of Diplomacy is cooperating with people who you may find distasteful. I just hate the idea that my private press would be revealed because someone had a grudge. (Then again, I'm not part of the leagues, so carry on with your witch hunt, you fuckheads. LOL, just kidding. )

Let them know you will not tolerate swearing. They have to play 4 more games with someone who will not tolerate that sort of crap. If it's a diplomatic ploy, it will logically be abandoned at that point.

Either way, it's still an important skill to be able to negotiate in the face of rudeness, though I hope it doesn't have to be used very often.

I just don't feel it's a problem that needs out-of-game enforcement.

Actually Chrisp, I find I quite often have to negotiate in the face of extreme abuse in the real world.

We're just in the beginning of the first league games. Isn't it a bit too early to start making rule changes?
There was already another forum thread with people giving assessment if the Leagues are good or not - a bit too early maybe? :)
May I suggest we hold off the analysis and changes for after we've finished some games.
I have never had any problem with bad language here - there'd be some moron from time to time - but they usually die first - and I would expect the League games to be even more selective when it comes to communication style - so let's give Natural Selection a chance :)

I'm all for Natural Selection! ...in case you couldn't tell. ;)

As opposed to unnatural selection?

Natural selection doesn't care whether it's got your votes. =D