[sorry that has become somewhat long as well ..]
I think that there a a couple of controversial points in what Icus wrote - beneath a lot much will agree and several interesting points which may be discussed further.
Channels
There is not much to say about that around is used for IC communication, and I agree indeed that it should be reserved for IC in all roleplay situations no matter wether somebody is contributing there by saying, grunting, whispering, gesturing, thinking, or even farting (scnr). As there are not only roleplayers in the game, situations may arise anytime, though, where some are using around OOC, but roleplayers should indeed mark any OOC comment.
The situation in other channels is trickier. In region, OOC is clearly default, but may be used IC in the course of events. Much more, ad hoc channels may be dedicated to RP and be reserved for, then. There is consensus that the Universum channels are completely OOC which means that IC communication should not occur, normally. Much more, any taunting, insulting etc. in those channels is considered a breach of chat rules even if it is "meant" IC. Btw, the chat rules in uni are indeed handled bit more liberally since the fusion so that not only random ingame chat, but also IC communication is tolerated to some extent. I tend to consider that a privilege, not a right, and to be dealt with with restraint.
Forums
Under my opinion, the headline over the forums group notwithstanding, there is only one forum fully considered IC (unless expressedly stated otherwise), namely the forum "roleplay (<server>)", all the others are not necessarily. The events forum is meant to announce events and discuss their details, OOC events as well als RP events, technical aspects as well as RP-related ones. In bazaar, business is done, frequently without regard of RP considerations (even if some roleplayers hate that), similarly, guild registry discusses many technically related issues of guild life even if the guild is RP oriented, and even completely OOC if it is not. That this forum here is OOC should be clear.
Roleplay rules and customs
While I agree to holding apart IC and OOC communication, I do not think that it is really a big deal. Even if OOC slips in with or without intention, or at least without evil intention, that can be figured out easily and dealt with most times. A bit of flexibility is necessary especially when dealing with RP newcomers.
Much more problematic is to achieve a consensus about what is IC at all and what not. Some Roleplayers consider PvP tags OOC (which sometimes ends up in the demand that other roleplayers ought to tag up) while others don't, some consider /tell and ingame mail to be OOC, as well as speaking in region while others don't. There is, IMHO, no final authoritative answer which opinion is "true" or "false". Rather there is the necessity to negotiate the mutual behavior in case those patterns are conflicting.
It is the very nature of roleplay that behaviour must be negotiated. There is no way to force such understanding of the world onto others. The only way is to respect differing views and to try to avoid clashes. This may imply, e.g., that during a mission in RP, Daomei informs some companions by /tell while she can't do that with those who consider it OOC, so that other methods must be used.
Conflicts and mistakes in roleplay
Icus mentioned that ingame racism does not imply that the player acting that way is a racist IRL. That is true beyond doubt. Yet it does not solve all problems. In theater, the actor of Duncan won't think that the actor of Macbeth is a murderer, and he would rather resent if he would not be killed ;). In the open situation of online roleplay, where the script is generated by the words and actions of the players, that is less simple.
Conflicts belong to roleplay, it would be boring without. But, the player playing an unpleasant role has some additional duties. One is prescribed by the rules of the games and violation defended as punishable, namely that one must not use RP as a disguise for abusing, mistreating, insulting or otherwise hindering other players to enjoy the game. That is a duty every player signed to follow when starting to play. So, when playing the racist, the villain, the rebel, one has the burden of responsibility that words and actions deriving from the role do not degenerate towards griefing. In doubt, one has to step back a bit.
Another point is breaking roleplay. It is not easy always to remain consistent in all utterings and actions, but one should work hard towards that goal to make the own role transparent to others allowing them to interact with. Illogical or deliberate behavior is not much better than abusive one, it may even be more damaging sometimes, killing fun and interaction.
An extremely problematic kind of RP, and a mistake frequently made, is "power RP", meaning RP actions which force the own RP behavior and its consequences onto others without their consent and without leaving them ways to develop their own RP responses. There is, unfortunately, an example in the event thread which led to this discussion. I mean the two "chronical articles" by Tao Sian, which indeed are an abhorrent example of power RP in two ways.
First, the form of a chronicle makes the contents uncontestable, as it is describing present and near future events from a wider future perspective (unless one assumes that the author was suffering from serious confusion when writing it down or is living in some parallel reality). So we "know" that the major threat of that year 2574 were not the Kitins, not assassination attempts of the clans of the marauders, not the Goo or anything else, but the Atys Rangers threatening the living planet with "the Ruin of Atys".
This does not leave many alternatives to those who have worked since many Atys cycles on the solution the Rangers had proposed. Either they agree to Tao Sian, then they cannot but abandon the damaging undertaking. Or they judge that either the dynastic healer has swallowed some wrong medicine, or even the heads of the Theocracy have lost their senses. While the Rangers never have condemned the search for alternative solutions of the Kitin tunnel threat, this approach practically calls for destruction of the "competing" event series with the termites.
I was a bit sad to see such from a member of the animation team. I hope that grave mistake in the arrangement can be corrected. I consider it intolerable that the players who contributed to the Rangers' event are vilified and frustrated in that way.
And that is an example how roleplay must not be done.
I think that there a a couple of controversial points in what Icus wrote - beneath a lot much will agree and several interesting points which may be discussed further.
Channels
There is not much to say about that around is used for IC communication, and I agree indeed that it should be reserved for IC in all roleplay situations no matter wether somebody is contributing there by saying, grunting, whispering, gesturing, thinking, or even farting (scnr). As there are not only roleplayers in the game, situations may arise anytime, though, where some are using around OOC, but roleplayers should indeed mark any OOC comment.
The situation in other channels is trickier. In region, OOC is clearly default, but may be used IC in the course of events. Much more, ad hoc channels may be dedicated to RP and be reserved for, then. There is consensus that the Universum channels are completely OOC which means that IC communication should not occur, normally. Much more, any taunting, insulting etc. in those channels is considered a breach of chat rules even if it is "meant" IC. Btw, the chat rules in uni are indeed handled bit more liberally since the fusion so that not only random ingame chat, but also IC communication is tolerated to some extent. I tend to consider that a privilege, not a right, and to be dealt with with restraint.
Forums
Under my opinion, the headline over the forums group notwithstanding, there is only one forum fully considered IC (unless expressedly stated otherwise), namely the forum "roleplay (<server>)", all the others are not necessarily. The events forum is meant to announce events and discuss their details, OOC events as well als RP events, technical aspects as well as RP-related ones. In bazaar, business is done, frequently without regard of RP considerations (even if some roleplayers hate that), similarly, guild registry discusses many technically related issues of guild life even if the guild is RP oriented, and even completely OOC if it is not. That this forum here is OOC should be clear.
Roleplay rules and customs
While I agree to holding apart IC and OOC communication, I do not think that it is really a big deal. Even if OOC slips in with or without intention, or at least without evil intention, that can be figured out easily and dealt with most times. A bit of flexibility is necessary especially when dealing with RP newcomers.
Much more problematic is to achieve a consensus about what is IC at all and what not. Some Roleplayers consider PvP tags OOC (which sometimes ends up in the demand that other roleplayers ought to tag up) while others don't, some consider /tell and ingame mail to be OOC, as well as speaking in region while others don't. There is, IMHO, no final authoritative answer which opinion is "true" or "false". Rather there is the necessity to negotiate the mutual behavior in case those patterns are conflicting.
It is the very nature of roleplay that behaviour must be negotiated. There is no way to force such understanding of the world onto others. The only way is to respect differing views and to try to avoid clashes. This may imply, e.g., that during a mission in RP, Daomei informs some companions by /tell while she can't do that with those who consider it OOC, so that other methods must be used.
Conflicts and mistakes in roleplay
Icus mentioned that ingame racism does not imply that the player acting that way is a racist IRL. That is true beyond doubt. Yet it does not solve all problems. In theater, the actor of Duncan won't think that the actor of Macbeth is a murderer, and he would rather resent if he would not be killed ;). In the open situation of online roleplay, where the script is generated by the words and actions of the players, that is less simple.
Conflicts belong to roleplay, it would be boring without. But, the player playing an unpleasant role has some additional duties. One is prescribed by the rules of the games and violation defended as punishable, namely that one must not use RP as a disguise for abusing, mistreating, insulting or otherwise hindering other players to enjoy the game. That is a duty every player signed to follow when starting to play. So, when playing the racist, the villain, the rebel, one has the burden of responsibility that words and actions deriving from the role do not degenerate towards griefing. In doubt, one has to step back a bit.
Another point is breaking roleplay. It is not easy always to remain consistent in all utterings and actions, but one should work hard towards that goal to make the own role transparent to others allowing them to interact with. Illogical or deliberate behavior is not much better than abusive one, it may even be more damaging sometimes, killing fun and interaction.
An extremely problematic kind of RP, and a mistake frequently made, is "power RP", meaning RP actions which force the own RP behavior and its consequences onto others without their consent and without leaving them ways to develop their own RP responses. There is, unfortunately, an example in the event thread which led to this discussion. I mean the two "chronical articles" by Tao Sian, which indeed are an abhorrent example of power RP in two ways.
First, the form of a chronicle makes the contents uncontestable, as it is describing present and near future events from a wider future perspective (unless one assumes that the author was suffering from serious confusion when writing it down or is living in some parallel reality). So we "know" that the major threat of that year 2574 were not the Kitins, not assassination attempts of the clans of the marauders, not the Goo or anything else, but the Atys Rangers threatening the living planet with "the Ruin of Atys".
This does not leave many alternatives to those who have worked since many Atys cycles on the solution the Rangers had proposed. Either they agree to Tao Sian, then they cannot but abandon the damaging undertaking. Or they judge that either the dynastic healer has swallowed some wrong medicine, or even the heads of the Theocracy have lost their senses. While the Rangers never have condemned the search for alternative solutions of the Kitin tunnel threat, this approach practically calls for destruction of the "competing" event series with the termites.
I was a bit sad to see such from a member of the animation team. I hope that grave mistake in the arrangement can be corrected. I consider it intolerable that the players who contributed to the Rangers' event are vilified and frustrated in that way.
And that is an example how roleplay must not be done.
---
Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral