Eighteenth-century sailors did not shy away from the hazards and hardships of life at sea, but they had a well-developed understanding of what constituted fair and acceptable treatment. They called this ‘good usage’: a concept that spanned far beyond pay to include factors like food, discipline, and dignity. This chapter offers a new interpretation of the Spithead and Nore mutinies that recognises each of them as a lengthy and complex negotiation between sailors and the state, centred on a restoration of perceived good usage. This approach finally makes it possible to reconcile the full range of, sometimes contradictory, mutineer rhetoric and behaviour within a single coherent explanation. This new perspective also challenges the oversimplified tendency to present Spithead as an inherently ‘good’ and the Nore as an irrefutably ‘bad’ mutiny by showing that their divergence was not inevitable and was largely due to the contrasting stance taken by the government. Active engagement and earnest negotiation set Spithead on a conciliatory path, whereas the state’s refusal to negotiate left the Nore sailors increasingly desperate and frustrated. Here too, matters of pride and good usage were pivotal.