Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 chimeara wrote:
I made a critical game losing mistake at my last tournament that my opponent knew about and he didn't tell me. I don't fault him one bit. Its my responsibility as a competitive player to cross all my t's and dot all the i's. My opponent shouldn't have to babysit me. We even Bro'd out after the game. No salt.

Same. I chose to fight with the wrong unit first, my opponent at a tournament then interrupted me for 2 CP and killed a Knight with a Warboss (if I had fought with that Knight first, I might have been able to claw my way back into the game, I was losing but would have had a chance). Big mistake, I was kicking myself for it, but it's certainly not my opponents fault I made a mistake.

let me clarify.....by mistake, I mean putting a unit down or making a move etc that is a bad choice for them, not a result of them forgetting a phase or to move or to shoot a unit.

In a recent league game I totally meant to deepstrike in 13 inches away from hellblasters with my hellblasters/intercessors unit....and I put them 9 inches away. My mistake, my opponent caught me with it and auspexed them off the board. No sour grapes here, I just forgot to properly place them.

So the majority of answers seems to be don't be a dick and do what you can to fairly win...but you don't have to tell your plans to your opponent.

Some of the answers.....do you mean to say you should go over every stratagem in the book with your opponent? Or tell them why you are placing a unit somewhere? ( these black templar scouts are deploying forward because I can negate a psychic power within 24 inches...You opponent then turtles in a corner, avoids your psychic null zone and gets full use of their powers.....This is another example of what I mean.)

 Horst wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
I made a critical game losing mistake at my last tournament that my opponent knew about and he didn't tell me. I don't fault him one bit. Its my responsibility as a competitive player to cross all my t's and dot all the i's. My opponent shouldn't have to babysit me. We even Bro'd out after the game. No salt.

Same. I chose to fight with the wrong unit first, my opponent at a tournament then interrupted me for 2 CP and killed a Knight with a Warboss (if I had fought with that Knight first, I might have been able to claw my way back into the game, I was losing but would have had a chance). Big mistake, I was kicking myself for it, but it's certainly not my opponents fault I made a mistake.

I somehow forgot to shoot with my 2 Helverins. He ad a badly wounded Morty and a fresh Magnus. Because I didn't finish off Morty Big M went to work on one of my knights and killed it. Followed by Magnus killing another. I would have only lost one had I shot.

I'm actually surprised by how many people are reminding others about uniqueness.
Is it not normal to swap lists with your opponents before each tournament match?

On "the only reason to play is to win"

I have a Nid army with 9 full sized ripper swarm with Max gear. I know my list sucks, I know I can't win. I play to draw. Always. I never play to win. Playing for the draw can really mess up my opponent.

I play a purely fluff based list, even in tournaments. My best option is to play to draw. It's way harder than it sounds.

In a casual game I will spend time discussing mistakes, tactical options, and things like that with my opponent. My logic is that a casual game should be for having fun and for learning, for both players. The exception is if the game is specifically arranged as a tourment practice, in which case I will treat it like a tourment game because of course.

In a tournament, before the game starts, I will provide my opponent with a copy of my list, then talk through my units and build with them. I'll quickly highlight which unit is which, including how to tell apart similar looking units, any wargear that isn't obvious, key special rules, powers, warlord traits, and so on. I'll also highlight stratagems and special rules that I expect to be relevant.. basically, if I expect to use it, I'll mention it and give them a chance to ask for more details. I'll then look over the other player's list and army, ask about anything that isn't obvious on the models, and ask about things I might be concerned about.

As a Tyranid and GSC player, I tend to have a long list of odd things my opponent might not be familiar with, and a few things I'm concerned with. In particular, pregame, I ask about ways to improve overwatch, to ignore LOS, interceptor, and spell defences, because these are things that can drastically impact my game plan.

I feel that I am obligated to be open about the abilities of my army, and not attempt a rules surprise for advantage during the game. I feel that it is my responsibility to identify the rules and abilities my opponent has that might give me trouble, if only because I can't expect my opponent to know my game plan and premptivly warn me.

Once the game has started, I don't remind opponents of things they miss, unless it's mandatory in the rules to do it. If they skip their orders because they are stressed on time, I'm not going to say anything. If they forget about two scouts in CC with a Neurothrope, I'll point it out, because resolving combats isn't a optional thing.

If something in my rules that I didn't talk about before the game is going to come up, I bring it up as soon as I realize it might matter. Normally these are things like Venomthrope close combat abilities, or Malenthropes getting to eat character brains for command points-the ability is so rarely relevant it's a waste of time to talk about in the before game spiel, but I don't want to surprise someone with it.

If they want to go back to something they forgot or skipped, I'm fine with it as long as nothing has happened that could change the decision to do whatever it is. So I'll let them do a charge they forgot about in some odd corner even if it's technically too late to declare it, but I won't let them declare a second unit charging my Hive Guard after their smash captain rolled 4 1's. If they missed something major, once they start rolling dice for the next phase, it is too late to go back. If they missed a major charge, I'll confirm that it is my turn, and take my time with moving my first unit, that way we avoid a situation where they feel like I pressured them into ending their turn early.

If I think they are wrong on a rule, or did something wrong, I'll politely address it, and I won't take offense if they think I did something wrong. I'm happy to pause the clock while double checking a rule or waiting for a TO.

I deeply dislike when people try to surprise me and use odd rules interactions or semantic tricks for ingame advantage. The game is deep enough and GW's rules writing weak enough that knowing all the weird rules details is challenging. If you have special snowflake overwatch and you mention it before the game, I'm happy. It's on me to remember and deal with that. If you spring it on me turn 3, because you saved it as a trick to get an advantage, I'm going to be annoyed.

I was a beginner in a tournament once. I made a ton of mistakes that my opponents told me about after the fact. I was super thankful for the post-game talk, but if they had been pointing out things in the middle of the game, I would have felt like they were trying to play the game *for* me.

So, no, I would not advise mid-game. I'd tell them after the fact, the better to learn so their next game/tournament can go better.

I think it comes down a bunch of different factors:

1. During a game, how glaring of an error does something have to be for you to be sure it's a mistake?
2. While you're busy trying to keep track of everything that you need to keep track of to win, how much attention do you have left for keeping track of what the other player is doing?
3. How sure are you that they're wrong and you're right?
4. Do they look like they want advice/are getting frustrated?
5. Are you sure you're not trying to talk them into doing something foolish/bad/worse than they're trying to do?

A lot of the time, I can't assume that I'm a better player of the other player's army than they are. But I have occasionally looked across the table, seen a player that's gotten paralyzed by their options, and started telling them what I think their best options are. Because sometimes people get brain-locked and need to get nudged to get playing.

I have done the "Are you really sure you want to do that and not X instead?" occasionally for really extreme mistakes. If I know that the other player is forgetting an optional rule, I'm going to remind them. But I'm not going to try to talk someone out of betting on luck or above average rolls.

Tourney? No.

Learning game with a new player? Absolutely.

Casual game with a friend? Depends on how long it'd been since they played and how intense our rivalry is, I suppose.


If I catch myself making an error or skipping a step/phase, I don't ask for/expect a Mulligan. Nobody else should, either. The Russians didn't give the Light Brigade a Mulligan, after all...

The Crimean War wasn't fought for fun, though.

I mean, if you're going to justify it by saying "but war's not like that", then you're OK with me piling all my models onto the table, regardless of the points value. After all, a real army isn't going to fight fair .

In a tournament setting, absolutely not. This is actually partly why I never consider tournament or competitive gaming - because I often do point out mistakes, things people forget, etc.

In a normal game? I provide info all the time, often to my detriment (perhaps too much so). Maybe it comes from hosting games at conventions or being a hobby game designer...but there is nothing more I despise than "gotcha" moments in a game, so I'm often informing my opponents (my gaming group) about dangerous threats or things that may not go as they're planning.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The Crimean War wasn't fought for fun, though.

I mean, if you're going to justify it by saying "but war's not like that", then you're OK with me piling all my models onto the table, regardless of the points value. After all, a real army isn't going to fight fair .

Didn't they try that last edition, and also in AOS before the gak storm made them renege?

In tournament or 'competitive' play no, as it is entirely possible they are aware of this mistake and using it as a distraction or have other plans based on performing that action that I am not aware of. Even if they aren't, I am of the opinion that players in that sort of gaming don't want that kind of thing in their games anyways. But I also don't play that sort of miniatures game as I don't find it fun usually.

In the actual games I play I very much point those things out if I am aware, and I would hope my opponent does as well since I don't play the same game/faction consistently enough to not constantly make those beginner mistakes.

I look at this way, if I was a competition-minded player, I would want my local group of players to be spun up on playing their armies to the best of the army's ability as soon as possible to maximize the challenge and increasing my own skill of the game. A high tide raises all boats and what not.

I'm wary of backseat gaming. I much prefer the approach of asking how familiar they are with my army at the start of the match and telling them to feel free to ask any questions regarding my army at any time. Past that it is on them to play the game to the best of their ability. Teach a man to fish and all that.

Making tactical errors is all part of the game. I do it all the time - I tend to be way more aggressive with movement than I should be and end up leaving objectives vulnerable or forgetting about fire lanes. I don't expect my opponent to say "hey are you SURE you want to put that Helbrute there? My lascannon team will be able to see it". That's on me. These are the kind of mistakes that you can only improve on through experience.

I also don't think that "I didn't know your army/unit/stratagem could do that!" is a reason to get upset. This game has 24 factions with their own Codex, 4 Forgeworld Index books, 2 campaign supplements, 2 iterations of Chapter Approved, and a bunch of other rules released on the Warhammer Community site and through White Dwarf. There's going to be stuff you don't know about!

My main opponent uses Imperial Guard and Sisters of Battle. I'm pretty familiar with their units and stratagems. I'm also familiar with what Death Guard and Chaos Space Marines can do, and I've got a decent grasp on Space Marines in general. But I haven't faced Tyranids since 3rd edition, and never been across the table from Genestealer cults. I've played against Dark Eldar early on, but I haven't played against them since their codex release. The fact is I don't know what tricks these guys can pull, so I've got to be cautious and not be over-confident. I'm not going to get upset that I had a stratagem sprung on me that I didn't know about.... because I didn't know about it! So many stratagems are situational and can be tricky to pull off, I'm not going to deny my opponent that opportunity because I didn't play it safe.

Karol wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
no. You are obligated to tell your opponent if they are making an illegal move, even if making that illegal move would benefit you. You are not obligated to help your opponent beat you by giving them strategic advice.

No that's not what he was asking. If they make an illegal move you should call them out on it but if they make a mistake or forget a rule etc. then that's their fault. All is fair in love and war.

Why not wait till they finish doing it, and get the adventage of calling a judge and getting them a warrning. I mean if in sports I notice that my opponent has a broken seal on his wrestling shoes, and call it out before the fight, nothing will happen. If I do it post match or in the middle of it, I can use it to disqualify him in case I lose. Kind of a basic thing you learn before you first event, in any sport. the only time you do react in an instant, is if you see something that can cause a big injury, because either you can get disqualified if you break him or he can use it to stop the match because he has no protection, specially if your winning.

The only reason you play in a tournament is to win, if you are not bothered about winning then you shouldn't play tournaments.

Well the only other reason to go to events would be to make others lose. There is a ton of ways to play without joining orgenised play. If you join an orgenise way of doing sports or anything, you get the good that comes from it and the bad. Expecting people to act in professional sports or anything with a ranking is kind of a foolish. But the good thing is not everyone has to play tournaments, so in the end it does not matter.

Removed - BrookM

Karol wrote:

Spoiler:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
no. You are obligated to tell your opponent if they are making an illegal move, even if making that illegal move would benefit you. You are not obligated to help your opponent beat you by giving them strategic advice.

No that's not what he was asking. If they make an illegal move you should call them out on it but if they make a mistake or forget a rule etc. then that's their fault. All is fair in love and war.

Why not wait till they finish doing it, and get the adventage of calling a judge and getting them a warrning. I mean if in sports I notice that my opponent has a broken seal on his wrestling shoes, and call it out before the fight, nothing will happen. If I do it post match or in the middle of it, I can use it to disqualify him in case I lose. Kind of a basic thing you learn before you first event, in any sport. the only time you do react in an instant, is if you see something that can cause a big injury, because either you can get disqualified if you break him or he can use it to stop the match because he has no protection, specially if your winning.

Drager wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
no. You are obligated to tell your opponent if they are making an illegal move, even if making that illegal move would benefit you. You are not obligated to help your opponent beat you by giving them strategic advice.

No that's not what he was asking. If they make an illegal move you should call them out on it but if they make a mistake or forget a rule etc. then that's their fault. All is fair in love and war.

Why not wait till they finish doing it, and get the adventage of calling a judge and getting them a warrning. I mean if in sports I notice that my opponent has a broken seal on his wrestling shoes, and call it out before the fight, nothing will happen. If I do it post match or in the middle of it, I can use it to disqualify him in case I lose. Kind of a basic thing you learn before you first event, in any sport. the only time you do react in an instant, is if you see something that can cause a big injury, because either you can get disqualified if you break him or he can use it to stop the match because he has no protection, specially if your winning.

In England this is what we call being a bad sport. Doing stuff like that gets you a highly negative reputation and in some sports can you sanctioned for unsportsmanlike conduct,especially if you do it regularly. In many sports here playing fair is seen as more important than winning, such that if you win and didn't play fair you will not be treated like you won. Unsportsmanlike behaviour is a close cousin of cheating.

Well if that's the only way you can win because you suck...

I rather win fair and square. Shows who the better player is by not winning by technicality or opponent making stupid mistake due to tournament's stupid time organization.

But guess if you are bad player who struggles to win you grasp any chance to win eventhough point of 40k isn't even to win.

Drager 775173 10442586 wrote:In England this is what we call being a bad sport. Doing stuff like that gets you a highly negative reputation and in some sports can see you sanctioned for unsportsmanlike conduct,especially if you do it regularly. In many sports here playing fair is seen as more important than winning, such that if you win and didn't play fair you will not be treated like you won. Unsportsmanlike behaviour is a close cousin of cheating.

Now I have never personaly wrestled against people from England, but I did vs Belarusians and Russians from Kalinigrad. I have seen bouts against Lithuanians, but never fought them myself. I also seen a ton of tapes of the best wrestlers in the world. And our trainer always showed us when someone was doing something technicly not legal, or kind of a illegal, but done in a such a way that non of the referees sees it. And it is not just my sports everyone does it. The footballer fall is a legendary thing, everyone does them, same as fouls being done on purpose. I personaly never had to hurt another sportsman durning a competition just so he doesn't progress further, it does not happen in under 18 sports much, if ever, but in older age groups when money is involved or going to big euro or world events, people do everything to get there.

But everyone learns stuff from older guys, and from the trainer. It is not even just to do it, but to know that someone could use it against you. For example when your in a youngling cathegory like me, and you wear head gear, there are guys who known how to abruptly turn their heads durning a clinch to hit you with part of the gear in the eye, and when your distracted they take you down. And to everyone it looks as if they performed a dynamic take down, sometimes even for 5pts.

This is normal stuff. Not saying there isn't crazier stuff. I know that in some countries you get brawls, and people pulling guns on each other.

Well if that's the only way you can win because you suck...

A win is a win. No one is going to take sponsor money or scholerships you took before you got caught. And in cases of some countries or divisions, everyone does everything that you never get caught. It is a normal thing in sports.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SHUPPET wrote:

Removed - BrookM/quote]
Not really follwing you there. I mean I know this is an insult, but I don't see in what part of my store do I seem to act like a scumbag? As the relevant part goes, am often confused by people use of certain words, or certain opinions. Like you can't like, but everyone does. Or act like a sportsman, but they don't seem to know what sports look like. I mean just ask anyone who got a scholarship or did sports at a higher then district level in any country, and they will be able to tell you a ton of stories, about what is considered sportsman like behaviour.

Karol wrote:

Not really follwing you there. I mean I know this is an insult, but I don't see in what part of my store do I seem to act like a scumbag? As the relevant part goes, am often confused by people use of certain words, or certain opinions. Like you can't like, but everyone does. Or act like a sportsman, but they don't seem to know what sports look like. I mean just ask anyone who got a scholarship or did sports at a higher then district level in any country, and they will be able to tell you a ton of stories, about what is considered sportsman like behaviour.

This has been pointed out to you already (I know because I was one of those that did it) but you're misunderstanding what "sporting" or "sportsmanlike" means in this context. It's not behaving as a competitor in a sport might behave when trying to win at all costs. It's behaving in a courteous way in the spirit of fair play. Failing to understand the difference between the two things explains a lot about your ridiculously toxic meta.

Karol wrote:

Drager 775173 10442586 wrote:In England this is what we call being a bad sport. Doing stuff like that gets you a highly negative reputation and in some sports can see you sanctioned for unsportsmanlike conduct,especially if you do it regularly. In many sports here playing fair is seen as more important than winning, such that if you win and didn't play fair you will not be treated like you won. Unsportsmanlike behaviour is a close cousin of cheating.

Now I have never personaly wrestled against people from England, but I did vs Belarusians and Russians from Kalinigrad. I have seen bouts against Lithuanians, but never fought them myself. I also seen a ton of tapes of the best wrestlers in the world. And our trainer always showed us when someone was doing something technicly not legal, or kind of a illegal, but done in a such a way that non of the referees sees it. And it is not just my sports everyone does it. The footballer fall is a legendary thing, everyone does them, same as fouls being done on purpose. I personaly never had to hurt another sportsman durning a competition just so he doesn't progress further, it does not happen in under 18 sports much, if ever, but in older age groups when money is involved or going to big euro or world events, people do everything to get there.

But everyone learns stuff from older guys, and from the trainer. It is not even just to do it, but to know that someone could use it against you. For example when your in a youngling cathegory like me, and you wear head gear, there are guys who known how to abruptly turn their heads durning a clinch to hit you with part of the gear in the eye, and when your distracted they take you down. And to everyone it looks as if they performed a dynamic take down, sometimes even for 5pts.

This is normal stuff. Not saying there isn't crazier stuff. I know that in some countries you get brawls, and people pulling guns on each other.

And English sports professionals are held to a standard much higher than you are describing, you act like the rest of us don't know anything about sports. I was trained in fencing in the same club as Olympic medalists (I'm nowhere near that good), they would in competition and friendly bouts always behave as good sportsmen, as defined above. What you are talking about doing has had people DQed in fencing tournaments I have participated in for conduct unbecoming. I'm not a wrestler, but I would hope that such standards would exist in that sport too.

The things you describe are, frankly, simple cheating and the way in which you get yourself (a) a bad reputation and (b) barred from play. Repeatedly fouling on purpose and being caught afterwards on video is the route to a permaban by more reputable sporting institutions. They are unsportsmanlike behaviour. You have had what that word (sportsmanlike, sporting and derivatives) means described to you on here several times by native speakers, we know what it means, whether you like it or not that is what it means in English.

Karol wrote:

Well if that's the only way you can win because you suck...

A win is a win. No one is going to take sponsor money or scholerships you took before you got caught. And in cases of some countries or divisions, everyone does everything that you never get caught. It is a normal thing in sports.

That's not a win in any real sense and, yes, you can lose scholarships and be sued to have money reclaimed by sponsors, if the sponsor required you conduct yourself in a sporting way. Codes of conduct are not uncommon and breaching them is taken extremely seriously. Winning by cheating is a display that you are less skilled than your opponent and, is from my perspective at least, a loss. It may be that where you live there are just lower standards of ethics in sport or that you don't have competitors with the level of skill required to win fairly, but that doesn't change the meaning of words or make your experience reflect the rest of the world.

Slipspace wrote:

Karol wrote:

Not really follwing you there. I mean I know this is an insult, but I don't see in what part of my store do I seem to act like a scumbag? As the relevant part goes, am often confused by people use of certain words, or certain opinions. Like you can't like, but everyone does. Or act like a sportsman, but they don't seem to know what sports look like. I mean just ask anyone who got a scholarship or did sports at a higher then district level in any country, and they will be able to tell you a ton of stories, about what is considered sportsman like behaviour.

This has been pointed out to you already (I know because I was one of those that did it) but you're misunderstanding what "sporting" or "sportsmanlike" means in this context. It's not behaving as a competitor in a sport might behave when trying to win at all costs. It's behaving in a courteous way in the spirit of fair play. Failing to understand the difference between the two things explains a lot about your ridiculously toxic meta.

Quoted for empahsis.

Not in a tourney.
Tactical moves might or might not be mistakes. You might not know what the opponent has in mind.
I'd leave it to discuss tactical questions during a tourney game.

Karol wrote:

A win is a win. No one is going to take sponsor money or scholerships you took before you got caught. And in cases of some countries or divisions, everyone does everything that you never get caught. It is a normal thing in sports.

Wrong. Most scholarships and sponsorships I know of actually have clauses about the conduct of the individual awarded the sponsorship or scholarship. Conduct both off and on the field of play is now routinely taken into account by sports teams and sponsors looking to sign players. For example, a part of the draft process for most professional American sports involves interviews with the players and their coaches and other college staff as well as background checks to determine whether they're a good fit for the organisation. A history of cheating or bending the rules can absolutely count against someone in that situation.

All professional sporting bodies have codes of conduct that cover not just strict adherence to the rules of the sport but also sections about bringing the sport into disrepute, with powers to fine or even permanently ban people breaking those codes.

There's another aspect of the tactical mistake: I know I've won games from time to time by making a "tactical mistake" that the opponent was all-too-happy to pounce upon - without thinking through the result.

I rarely get to do that in 40k because, strategically, it's such a simple game. It happens a lot more in almost anything (Chess, Total War, etc).

In 40k, all game state is intended to be known. But the intentions behind the the other guy's decisions are not necessarily known. So if it seems the opponent does not know/understand game state, the proper thing to do is to clarify game state. But if the guy makes bad decisions despite knowing the game state, it's improper to point that out when competing.

Bharring wrote:
There's another aspect of the tactical mistake: I know I've won games from time to time by making a "tactical mistake" that the opponent was all-too-happy to pounce upon - without thinking through the result.

I rarely get to do that in 40k because, strategically, it's such a simple game. It happens a lot more in almost anything (Chess, Total War, etc).

In 40k, all game state is intended to be known. But the intentions behind the the other guy's decisions are not necessarily known. So if it seems the opponent does not know/understand game state, the proper thing to do is to clarify game state. But if the guy makes bad decisions despite knowing the game state, it's improper to point that out when competing.

This is essentially what I was trying to say, but you put it better.

To be honest I have to break a stick for Karol here.

At least here with football is just the same. Why do you think professional players always exaggerate whenever one rival touchs them? They are trained to do that since they are kids playing in the juvenile clubs.

I have friends that stoped playing footbal in juvenile profesional leagues exactly because of that.

If we could kindly get through a topic without slinging insults, that would be great..

 Galas wrote:
To be honest I have to break a stick for Karol here.

At least here with football is just the same. Why do you think professional players always exaggerate whenever one rival touchs them? They are trained to do that since they are kids playing in the juvenile clubs.

I have friends that stoped playing footbal in juvenile profesional leagues exactly because of that.

Regardless, this is cheating and unsporting. There's a stigma against players from certain countries here because we consider diving to be poor sport and inappropriate for a professional player abs they are taught to do it.

Personally, I wouldn't try to "coach" my opponent unless it was a newer, learning player. In the reverse, I definitely would not want to be coached by someone else. If I pay dearly for a mistake and lose the game then so be it, I'll learn for the next time.

The example you gave of Auspex Scan is in a lot of codexes as Auspex Scan, and the same capability is in more still in slightly different forms. It shouldn't be a surprise to someone playing in a tournament. You have held back some CP you could have used elsewhere in order to have this capability, of course you should use it.

I've got a Tau commander kitted out specifically to kill Eversors, Kelermorphs and the like, at the expense of all round effectiveness. My opponent could still deploy either of those, and it might survive my shooting. But if it doesn't it will look like a blunder on their part. Having that sort of deterrent will change their plans. My new Black Legion army has World Killers which could be used decisively to win close games. If my opponent doesn't know about it I can use it to win. If he does know, he has to play as if I will use it, changing his plans.

I like these types of interactions and getting rid of them seems strange to me. IMO giving your opponent "advice" is more likely to be bad etiquette than the other way around.