What games do you play?

LOL

or having preset alliances before a game starts IE : Hey lets go pwn diplomacy togther "okies"!!!

True, preset alliances are matagaming, but I think they are harder to pull off as you don't know that you and your ally will be able to do much together in game, not knowing which nation you each will get.

I consider meta-gaming to be when a player uses outside influences to change the course of a game. This is not against the rules, however, it is considered "frowned upon". Most players will be extremely angry if someone meta-games.

What about looking at a player's game history to get a feel for how they play?

I do that all the time, its called research :P

totally legit like in any sport.

I consider doing research on someone to be a good strategy. If a player doesn't want me to know that he invariably stabs Austria when he plays Italy, he should change things up once in a while ;)

Now, I consider that a legitimate tactic. Just as in war, you should know what the enemy's approach is. It's part of intelligene gathering.

I really need to get a new keyboard. This one is constantly dropping keystrokes.

Metagaming=>
It is a little confusing as used here compared to as used elsewhere.

Cross Gaming: is considered illegal/cheating (except in specific team tournaments where this is allowed) is where you say you help me in game X and I will help you in game Y

Metagaming: In many face to face tournaments and as I believed used in Australia initially for their multi-tournament ranking called Bismarck Cup, or Grand Prix elsewhere, is when you make a decision in a specific game based not on the situation in that game but how it affects you over all in the greater ranking in the tournament or the larger ranking contest. A classic example of this which was quite a scandal when it happened was when a player in the final round of a tournament threw a game to another player when he realized that the impact of it would be to depress the score of another player in that game that was in contention to win that tournament while also killing the prospects for another player in contention for winning the Bismarck Cup so that the schemer could then win that Cup as he had no chance in the tournament in question.

Metagame as used here seems to be more of a situation of Cross Boarding as described above.

Metagaming in terms of 'outside influences' on the game in question is really very vague here. For example numerous players I have encountered have taken all sorts of postures in games I have played here that have nothing to do with the game being played but are based on the point system/ranking system that is played within this site. Is that metagaming with outside influences?
Is attacking someone because of their Forum Comments an issue of metagaming as I have seen here. Probably in my book it is poor sportsmanship and not true meta gaming as the 'meta' aspect does not relate to gaming at all. In the same view of mine, which is again biased by FtF, Postal Play and Play outside of this site, I would not call attacking someone because of their political, religious, ethnic views or reality or because you thought they were an internet stalker, as a metagame aspect, but again simply as poor sportsmanship.
As another extreme if you go down the street of it being metagaming to attack people for some outside influence, you might say that attacking someone for something that they cannot change would also qualify as meta-gaming in the negative sense, then within that definition attacking someone who is seen as a better player than you would also qualify as a metagame negative act, after all you cannot change what you had for breakfast, let alone the history of your skills.

So it is tricky situation at times.

Edi, I disagree.

In my mind, metagaming is when a player brings in considerations outside of the specific game. So, attacking someone based on personal views is not sportsmanship, but metagaming. You are bringing something outside of the game into it.

An interesting question is whether a threat along the lines, "if you do X then I will throw the game to country Y," is metagaming. In order for the threat to have merit, one must pull through with it, or any subsequent threats will be toothless. that is, one must fulfill the threat in order to maintain credibility in future games... so is this a case of metagaming?

Well as I said it is a tricky situation and there is room for lots of flexibility in language. That is why some of these terms and activities are defined in the sites House Rules ((HINT HINT))

As for the throwing the game, I strongly disagree with it being defined as metagaming or anything outside of the game. It is strictly an in game threat that is well within the confines of regular play and whether you have done it before or not is only a matter of skill more than anything else. For example I have used the REVERSE threat to end a game where I have said that unless players agree to a draw then I will SOLO. That is not metagaming or cheating or anything negative in my book.

well recognizing people from previous games.... I would hope to ally with previous allies or play games with people who were somewhat trustable in previous games..... that isn't metagaming is it? I would considering it nothing more than common sense.... some of these people are almost stupid what they will stab over....

As has been said, linking across games can be very hard to detect. When I use the term I use it in reference to people allying because they know each other in real life and trust their friends not to stab them. However, for me the meaning is taking someone outside the game unfairly into the game. For example, it seems fair in a league that you would be allowed to think about who's leading that league etc, but the leagues I feel are rather different to the 'main' games.
I'm strongly in favour of adding anonymous games (which you'll surely hate Edi, with your view on using real names!) because in those situations no player will know who any other is, and it can be played fairly. Also, I think anon games will lead to people trying more interesting alliances and strategies, but that's a different conversation to have!

Actually I have no problem with Anonymous games, I just finished one on another site. There you are going into the game with the concept of being anonymous along with everyone else.

I think anonimous games won't solve the problem, people knowing each other from outside phpdip can still go into a game together, and contact each other outside of phpdip to let each other know wich country they are playing, and it is the same, only worsst because you can't look into their record to see if they played together before or something.