sure looks like he needs to learn some english as well

Wow. That's unbelievable. How old are they? Four?

I've been trying to learn to speak polotics for for years. It's a really complicated language to master.

Errr "polotics for years". (Bah way to go self, make fun of someone else for their poor communication skill and then screw up in doing so.)

well thats how they spelled politics....
I am curious how old that person is though. Can't be past 15.

You'd be surprised. Could just as easily be a 20 something idiot who doesn't really know how Diplomacy works. Ie. doesn't understand that "Hey, I should you know, talk to people. Do diplomatic stuff." (Then again I can be a little silent in games myself so I shouldn't really be making fun.)

How do you know it isn't a tactic on his part? I don't keep a consistent writing style in my anonymous games. Sometimes, it is advantageous to appear as a noob. I also agree with your opponent-- much of the press on this site skews tends to be overly grandiose and abstruse.

Either way, unless the game is finished, you probably shouldn't be discussing it in the forums.

sorry the word 'skews' shouldn't be in there...whenever you criticize writing, you are almost guaranteed to make a writing mistake.

Of course it's grandiose and abstruse! This is, after all, a roll playing game of sorts; you are take on the roll of some potentate why not add a little flair. Go big, as "they" say; at least in the first couple years. It can add to the fun, and can aid in sussing out a potential ally.

And as for making a letter a little... esoteric, well that simply covers your ass should you not do "exactly" what you said you were going to do. "Sure we had a cease fire, but that doesn't mean I can not support hold your enemies units," and the like.

I don't think Diplomacy is a role playing game at all. I see it as a very good boardgame. Many board games -- including monopoly, risk, etc-- have diplomacy elements. And we don't speak like robber barons when we play monopoly. Diplomacy is just a better boardgame because of its simplicity and because luck is reduced to the random allocation of powers.

Anyway, even if you guys do consider it a role playing game, there's no rule that the role has to be some annoyingly dusty polisci enthusiast. Paulsalomon27's opponent could be role playing as an inexperienced illiterate.

No we don't speak as robber barons in Monopoly, but one can play an entire game of Monopoly without speaking at all. This game, originally at least, centered around communication. If one wants to indulge themselves and take advantage of using the written word to the fullest, then who are we to look down upon them for it? In fact I applaud them for doing so, as the ability to communicate with any sort of eloquence seems to be falling by the way side.

Of course the tone you take in any letter affects the readers views, and writing a letter in such a way may cause someone to think their opponent to be less experienced; allowing for some unexpected stabs.

hahaha. I love it. What a fun little discussion. I do tend to take on a bit of dramatic, decorated language when I play, but all in good fun. I really believe it helps me play the game. Theres a reason diplomats speak in such terms...

and @frank - this is not a gunboat game, so revealing my identity is not an issue. I have not included any content with respect to the game play at all. Simply that I sent a message, and one was sent back. I hardly think I need to keep it hush hush during the game.

If I got that message I would assume it was a put on role and not real. Be interesting to see who it ends up being.

Oh, I was assuming an anonymous game. Maybe less likely in a non-anon game. But still very possible IMHO.

@ChestRockwell- there is a difference between abstruseness/pomposity/pretentiousness and eloquence.
one of the reasons i prefer gunboat is that i cant stand the 'oh worthy kaiser, we must stand together to vanquish the evil Sultan' type of press. i'm not the kaiser, i'm the guy playing germany and something like 'hey man, would you mind supporting A Bud - Rum? its a good idea because of x, y and z' would more than suffice.

@Paulsalomon27, i think the prohibition on discussing ongoing games in the forum is not only about revealing your identity. by putting this guy's press into the forum, you are going to get the community's validation that this guy is a retard. and that may influence the behaviour of the other players in the game.

"Jeeze" is very American an expression and I don't hear non-native speakers use it much at all. So I don't think we can give him the benefit of the doubt that he's not a native-speaker.

Nor do I see any player putting such near-analphabetism on as an act.

It's just an extremely sloppy fellow who's orthography-challenged. Most probably North American, in his teens, a total Diplomacy newbie - and an utterly disengaged and uninterested one at that.

I'd be very surprised if he were to remain involved in the hobby. He's a near-gunboater and there's a high risk of him NMRing/abandoning, I'd say.

He's painting a giant crosshairs on his back and fully deserves to be attacked and eliminated. Which is why I can't possibly see this as a purposeful act.

As for the extent of roleplaying, one sign of a relative noob (at least in pbem circles) is going over the top with pompous roleplaying.

That being said, it's very common to speak of the "Président", "Archduke", "Tsar" etc.

In pbem-Diplomacy, players often also submit "press" to be included in an adjucation. Often this is written like a press release or newspaper article with historical references. I really appreciate these. They're part of what makes human-adjucated Diplomacy more personal and intense an experience.

Charlesf's post is a great example of why this shouldn't be in the forum; he just called for a course of action in a game he isnt involved in. Other players may be influenced by that, especially since Charles here is apparently an elder statesman of internet diplomacy.

anyway, i think it could be a viable strategy; maybe he wants you to think that he is incapable of higher level tactical maneuvers. Or maybe he thinks you'll leave him alone if you think he's not a serious threat. i myself would be less annoyed with a guy who uses abbreviations than with a guy who uses orthography and near-analphabetism in consecutive sentences.

Also, @charlesf, why is near-gunboater a pejorative term for you? do you see no merit in gunboat games?

frit desert.

Well said Frank.

The funny thing about saying, "it's a just a game," is that that phrase can go both ways. Sure, there is, "it's just a game, why pretend I'm the Tsar." But on the other hand, there's the, "It's just a game, why not have some fun with it. And if person A enjoys pretending one thing and person B enjoys straight forward speak and person C only plays gunboat, who the hell am I to say any one of them is wrong."

Also, I tend to use the term for the countries leader as I don't know whether that person playing is a "man" or not. I, personally, tend to find it a little ridiculous to assume everyone on this site is male. Do I continue it for the entire game? No, it can get a bit tedious, but at first? Sure, why not.

>>> Charlesf's post is a great example of why this shouldn't be in the forum; he just called for a course of action in a game he isnt involved in.

So? IMO, it's perfectly fine to do so.

>>> especially since Charles here is apparently an elder statesman of internet diplomacy

Hehe, I wish! :)

>>> why is near-gunboater a pejorative term for you?

In the context of a non-gunboat game very much so. One expects one's fellow players to be reasonably communicative and engaged in the game.

>>> do you see no merit in gunboat games?

Personally, I don't. But that's a matter of taste and has nothing to do with the above.

Of course, in a gunboat game you expect all players to be gunboaters (indeed, it'd be cheating to be anything else).

@Chest Rockwell: every person on the internet is a male. sorry about your luck

@charlesf: its perfectly fine for you to offer your thoughts. however, its discouraged to post about ongoing games that you are in because it may unfairly influence the other players. for example, PaulSolomon should have to convince the others in his game through diplomacy that the illiterate player should be treated as a fool and eliminated. Appealing to outside observers to help validate this case is somewhat cheating.

>>> And if person A enjoys pretending one thing and person B enjoys straight forward speak and person C only plays gunboat, who the hell am I to say any one of them is wrong.

Person C has no business being in non-gunboat games. He'd be very wrong joining them and ruin the game for others.

Whether to roleplay or not is a matter of taste. I'm just telling you that elaborate roleplaying tends to be the sign of a less experienced Dipper. Part of the reason why that's the case, is because more experienced (and hence usually better) players have done their share of roleplaying in the past, but now focus more on the mechanics of playing and winning the game.

>>> Appealing to outside observers to help validate this case is somewhat cheating.

Again, not at all how the pbem community approaches things. In many pbem games, observers chip in with their thoughts. I've seen observers say rate positions in terms of creditworthiness (i.e. how promising a position it is). Like an early 20th century's bank report. All very entertaining.

Players ought to be confident enough in their own play not to let their play be influenced by third-parties.

i hate to break it to you, chucky, but this ain't the pbem community. take it or leave it.

plus he used the term "near-analphabetism"

>>> i hate to break it to you, chucky, but this ain't the pbem community. take it or leave it.

And for the most part, I will leave it. I wouldn't again join a non-password-protected game here. The one very negative experience I've had in that regard has been quite enough for me.

>>> plus he used the term "near-analphabetism"

Yep. Granted perhaps a bit hyperbolic, but does the person who wrote the above message appear to be well-educated?

You accept that people may choose to play games in a slight role-play situation.
Well, why can't they choose to play the role of someone who doesn't speak, or doesn't speak good English?
Either way,

(sorry, accidentally sent early - darn track-pad!)
Either way, that's his choice of how to play, and he is totally entitled to this.

As for the "this shouldn't be posted" line of thinking, I never reveed which game this was or which player or nation sent this, so I don't see anyway this could affect game play. Tell me I'm wrong.