Essentially a face-to-face phenomenon, this is an extra unit slipped onto the board, or exchanged for a piece of a different type (say, an Army for a Fleet) or colour. If it goes undetected, the player controlling it will often endeavour to embroil it in the development of the game so thoroughly that, even if spotted, it becomes difficult to rectify the mistake. House rules may vary in such circumstances: under some house rules, it is possible to swap F(Tus) for A(Tus), order it to Venice, then "spot" the mistake and have it changed back to a fleet. In others, the unit will be moved back to Tuscany and made a fleet once more, or have to remain an army for the rest of the game. Where there is not a GM, this sort of duplicity is thoroughly within the spirit of the game, for all that the more "sober" games-player may disapprove.

However, in postal play, this sort of thing is only possible if the GM makes a mistake or is misled by a player (perish the thought!), and since it is generally acknowledged that deception of the GM is unacceptable, the latter is likely to result in the player being ejected from the game, the zine, and perhaps worse.

The above from "http://www.badpets.net/Diplomacy/AtoZ/EF.html"

What more could they do? I hardly think cheating like that is grounds for forming a lynch mob.

I'll have to try that in a face to face. It sounds really fun.

The problem is a variant usually needs: new game options, altered adjudicators, new maps, new borders, new test cases, altered order generation, etc

They're a pretty huge amount of work for a small variant following, so it'll definitely be a long time until we've made standard Dip perfect and can move on to variants
(Except perhaps trivial ones like Italy Rome fleet, which may be added sooner)

LOL, I just think it would be so cool of Kestas to spend some time writing a code that would allow us all to cheat. My request wasn't serious Kestas, I would never really use a flying dutchman. (again) OK I was young, losing badly, and bigger boys made me do it.

The problem would always be that, when "institutionalised", it wouldn't go unnoticed.

"(Except perhaps trivial ones like Italy Rome fleet, which may be added sooner)" And don't forget Winter 1900

Those two look set to be the first in yes. After those it would probably be very simple things such as games set up as teams, where instead of 7 players you only have 3 from the start etc.
However, it will take time people!

Shouldn't global press only be the easier to implement?

no press hypothetically should be easiet as all you need to do is take away code!

Same for Global.

I agree with the fact that some cheating is acceptable, in f2f and online, such as eavesdropping or looking at other peoples orders, but I think switching pieces is going as bit far - it is a strategy game after all.

There is no way anyone could pull off a Flying Dutchman swap in a game with 12- or 24-hour turn cycles in which to spot the switch, especially since as Ghostmaker said it would be "institutionalized" and everyone would know this particular sort of cheating was possible.

I expect this variant would quickly turn into players openly "cheating" and trying to convince EVERY other player that the swap didn't threaten them... actually, that sounds sort of interesting!

But the spirit of the Flying Dutchman probably only works for the board game. And I would rather see press, team, and alternate map variants before the above.