I just came back to remove my "Viking snowflake" comment as unnecessary and not particularly kind, but I see that it was grabbed up and responded to with great length.
So, I guess I'm glad I didn't live during the Viking days if pointing out ones sensitivity could result in punishment by death.
Sounds like my Viking ancestors had something in common with today's college students requiring safe spaces to keep them from having their feelings hurt. 
Not so. Since there were no forms of mass communication, internet, newspapers, a person's reputation was real property. It determined how the rest of society received them and interacted with them.
Honor (and reputation) called for the head of a household (usually a farmer) to extend hospitality (food and lodging) for 3 days to travelers. Most would, with whatever means they had, and word got around that Thorstein was a generous and upright man. In return, his esteem around the District rose as people spoke well of him, gave him the benefit of the doubt, and opened doors to him and his householders.
Can't remember which saga it was in, but there was one man who earned himself the name of Halfdan the meal stingy. Needless to say that didn't do much good for him around His neighborhood.
And of course there was a downside to Abusing the hospitality of others.
If bums just traveled around the District mooching bed and board they were castrated as criminal vagrants.
Those who weren't Landed Men/Women made agreements for 1 year at a time to work on the farms of those who owned them. And once every year came the "Moving Days" when they could figuratively sign on for another year, or go sign on to work for another farm owner.
So you can see how being known as the 'Meal Stingy' could cost you money, as no one would want to work your farm for you.
Society was full employment. Didn't agree to work for your keep as a farm owner's 'householder'?
Criminal Vagrancy again. See above.
At the other end of the spectrum came the word
regi/ergi (depending on the scribe and edition).
It was the lowest insult one man could call another. It translates as 'unmanly'.
It covered cowardice, effeminate behavior, cross dressing, and homosexuality.
The target was not only legally allowed, but expected, to kill his slanderer on the spot.