Facebook Diplomacy was developed using an older version of the source code for this site. This site is the original and the best. It has many features that are lacking in the Facebook version and the standard of play is much higher.
If you have only just joined us - welcome.

1) No. For more info on detailed rule issues see
http://webdiplomacy.net/datc.php
Click on "Show DATC choice details" to see all of the nuanced adjudication decisions.

2) phpDip on Facebook is basically a port of this website to the facebook platform. The code for this site is open source and people are free to set up their own installations. I believe it is using a much older version of the code. The community and games are completely independent.

thanks for your answers :)

Re: Unwanted convoys. I've always felt this took something away from the game. To me, unwanted convoys were another risk to be mitigated same as unwanted support against a self bounce. And I know the judges took it even further by having the army's move specify the full convoy route. I'm not sure which I dislike more: the "any route will do" where a dislodgement might not stop the convoy if an alternate convoy route can be found in the orders, or having to follow a specific route. I'd much rather be true to the boardgame rules and allow an unrequested convoy.

How does an unrequested convoy work, D?
And I always thought it was weird that a convoy can still take place even if it's attacked.

It works like this.

France has a Fleet Gulf of Lyon, F Marseilles.

England has a A Spain, A Gas, F W Med.

France suspects England will be going Spain to Mars with Gas support and bouncing W Med off Gulf of Lyon. He has no hope of keeping Mars.

But he doesn't need to go down a SC.

F GoL C A Spain to Marseilles. F Marseilles to Spain.

Oh okay, because the act of convoying counts as a move and a half (sort of). It's as if th game allows Spain to take Mars while A Mars steps on the fleet in GoL, and then it moves to Spain. Calling it an unrequested convoy seems weird though.

Well, England isn't requesting it, in fact, he'd much rather not trade Spain for Mars.

It's a French fleet convoying an English army so another French fleet can move to the vacated province.

Wait, so the A Spain moves to Mars, Mars get bounced to Pied or disbanded, and then the F GoL convoys that army that used to be in Spain and should now be in Mars back to Spain?
Am I reading that correctly?

No.

A Spain gets to Mars via the GoL convoy, not land. This allows the F Mars to get into Spain, since otherwise he'd have to retreat Piedmont or disband. Because now, with the unrequested convoy, the army is coming from GoL, making Spain a valid move for the Mars unit. It's still A Spain for purposes of Gas supporting it, though.

Oh, but I thought an army CANNOT be convoyed unless it asks specifically to be convoyed.

That's only in the webdip version. It's a legit strategy in the board game rules.

Also, in the board game, you can write anything in your orders and if you mess up, sucks to be you, the unit holds. Like if I accidentally had Spain S A Gascony to Mars when there was no A in Gascony (damn it, I meant Burgundy!). It's still possible to misorder in Webdip, but not AS possible.

I didn't realize that was legit in the board game rules. And I knew that miswriting orders do result in holding in FtF. I've benefited more than once because other people didn't write correctly.

In webdip, misorders are still valid orders, where as misorders in the boardgame and in the old postal version could be orders like A Mun-Mos (an impossible move no matter what as both are landlocked).

Right, in my example, there was no A Gascony to support, so it wasn't a valid order. Webdip will only let you support hold or support move units that are physically there.