[changed from a comment]
violence/non-violence is a false dichotomy. when people don't even agree on what those terms mean, why try to create ideological boxes based on them, and shoe-horn people into them?
i tend to think of people's behavior - what they do, not how someone labels what they do. behavior that is unacceptable to me in one situation may be completely acceptable in another. and behavior that is acceptable to me in some situation, may be completely unacceptable to another in a similar situation.
again, context is key. to me, principles are guidelines based on desire and experience (and maybe other stuff too); they are not "rules". the context of any situation will determine how any principle i might hold factors into my thoughts and behavior in that situation. i might ignore a principle entirely, if the situation calls for it. or i might adapt the principle for that situation.
the nap, like any rigid ideological stance, has no concept of context. hence, it is useless to me.