i think its ok providing the accusation of meta gaming was in the game chat. The other 4 puppets in this case should look into your accustion and not just take your word for it, if they dont then that's their fault. the accused parties should defend their actions to those 4 and demand to see evidence.
however posting it in the forum would be very very wrong.

I seem to remember this story from my youth in the village ((East Village))
about the girl who cried wolf. I think they eventually only found her shoes after the third time.

Sean is abosolutely right

kibby I hate you with all my heart </3

don't post here.

and I just figured it may work after the first year. Get them riled up and swoop in and by that time it would be to late :D

ofc. Having a set ally before this who knows the plan will help as well.

I know other sites have it in their rules, that you are not allowed to accuse, except to the gm. Since this site does nowhere have this rule stated, it's not forbidden.

Well, I would say, like sean said, as long as it's kept in-game then go ahead, but don't bring it to the public forum simply to further your diplomatic ends. There's no need for public slander, but in-game it's definitely a viable tactic.

Here's my input.
Though legal, certainly underhanded. I mean after all the frenzy in this forum about how this should not be done, and people who do this should be ran over and defeated at all costs, now to falsely accuse people of this just for your own glory and self gradification to me seems a bit beneath the high honor and pure diplomatic coersion that this prestine site represents. I mean the only reason this tactic would even work is because of the extreme visibility it has gotten on this forum. So if this stategy is the only was you can chalk up a victory, then maybe you should go try Monopoly or Dominoes :).

Already too good at both (not to mention tic-tac-toe and checkers :O)

=P

Now honestly if lying about alliegences then stabbing people in the back is "the high honor and pure diplomatic coersion" then how much beneath can lying about an allience be. As I see it it is just like saying "OMG OMG OMG AUSTRIA+TURKEY HAVE AN ALLIANCE AND ARE GOING TO ATTACK YOU GERMANY OMG OMG QUICK ALLY WITH ME AND I'LL HELP YOU FIGHT EM" even when you have no clue whether or not they are allies.

This is all a question of metagaming, which in general is unethical. Basically, all players should behave as if they know nothing outside the game. While strategy and such obviously comes into the game from the outside, the basic idea is that in general nothing else does.

By bringing an out-of-game situation into the game like this, one is indeed metagaming, since meta- simply means "above" and metagaming means to play above the game, or outside of the game strictly speaking, as opposed to playing the "role" of a player in the game.

Oh, and the sentence that contained references to honor, purity, and Diplomacy all at once...I see your point, but still...rofl.

presumably looking at the history of other players' games and using it to (attempt) to predict what they may do in a certain situation, is not considered unethical? If I belonged to a board gaming club in the real world I would have access to the same type of information. Can you let me know if this is considered okay.

I don't see a problem with that, dmwits. I would group that into the "strategy and stuff" that is allowable within the realm of the "player" that is on the level of the game being played.

It would simply seem to me that playing the game outside of the game (i.e., attempting to use things that have nothing to do with the game as it exists essentially and as it relates to the "player" [i.e., the role assumed by a person playing the game]) would be unsportsmanlike.

Diplomacy is meant to be a test of strategic, tactical, and rhetorical capability, as TrueHeart I believe was trying to point out. It's a game to be played, for the sake of testing the mettle of the players (who assume the roles of "players") as it relates to the game, not as it relates to irrelevant rumor-mongering (there's plenty of room for relevant rumor-mongering within the game itself).

Of course, this would tend to come down to a personal conviction more than anything else as a result of the fact no site I know of has any sort of rules established concerning this particular sort of thing. However, for anything to work as best it may the rules shouldn't just be followed, but the spirit of the activity to be undertaken ought to be respected.

As I said though, all personal conviction (i.e., opinion), and therefore subjective by necessity. :)

Generally I think anything goes in Diplomacy. BUT falsely accusing a player of cheating and telling other players too, when you know the allegations are false is just slander. So I vote no.

You certainly won't make any friends this way. Just talking about it makes me wish I could punch you in the nose from here

I agree that you can, and it is within the rules. However, I feel that it falls into a category of things such as abusive language which are viewed as being "too underhand" and will not make you a popular guy!

Actually I'm against this because it'd be likely to get to the public forum and waste moderators time (and distract them / dilute the real cases of meta-gaming). I think we need to cut down on meta-gaming/multi-accounting accusations

what?? are you saying we should tolerate multiaccounters? what are moderators for anyway?

Alamote, I believe he's saying we need to cut down on them unless there's actual reason to believe there is metagaming/multi-accounting occurring. I don't think anyone has a problem with calling out someone who is clearly cheating, but false accusations are ungentlemanly, ruin peoples' ability to play on here, and waste everyone's time - to say nothing of the additional paranoia they cause. Lord knows there's enough paranoia in Diplomacy already!

lol @ "too diplomatic"