User talk:Mex-psych

RfC
Please see Requests for comment/Rorschach test images. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 16:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * As a new user, you may not be familiar with RFC procedure. Even though you made a statement, you are free to sign your name under any other statements you may agree with. Best regards, and welcome! –xenotalk 18:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

August 2009
Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that this is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. ''diff This kind of message is not respectful, and should not be made here. It is very close to behaviour which can lead to bans.'' Verbal chat  21:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Mex-psych's post does not appear to me to be a legal threat of any kind.  SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 21:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "It is very close to behaviour which can lead to bans." I think it is just this side of the NLT line, but it isn't civil. So, WP:AGF, I placed a warning as notification (and warning) rather than asking for them to be blocked. The warning text 'could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against' is clearly met. Verbal chat  21:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I make no such threats. You have not read properly. Just I state the facts that the one psychological test is different for the copyright and the makers of the test, so the idea of new policy is not required. It is not my rules that copyright holders follow. I make the respectful post and you make the threat at me. Very upset. I never mean any disrespect to any peoples. I make this clear always. So I understand perhaps the free discussion is not okay, so now I should stop any more postings to American wikipedia? You will understand no requirement to fire the user who will make this resignation. I write again with respect. Mex-psych (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Mex, please keep on posting. Your contributions have been extremely helpful&mdash;calm, intelligent, and giving a much-needed perspective. The above is just a misunderstanding. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 22:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I concur with SV. There was no legal threat... Though you do need to be cautious when suggesting that editors and/or Wikipedia are opening themselves up to legal liability because it may appear to be or be misinterpreted as a legal threat, implied or otherwise. –xenotalk 22:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That is why I placed the warning! That's what warnings are for. If he had made a legal threat, rather than just suggesting it, I would have taken him to ANI. The idea of a warning is to stop a repeat of behaviour or to stop behaviour escalating to problematic levels. Verbal chat  08:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I went the courts one time and responsibility was for me to help the honored court to know that it is a harm to not keep the copyright and to provide the protection to the testing. No one had any of the threats, just informations that help. The copyright holders and the test makers made no threats or lawsuits neither, so I say it is not required to have a new policy for the psychological testing if the wikipedia has the policy to not put the copyright information on to the pages. This Rorschach information is the one different one which has no more copyright in some countries for these pictures and informations. Why make the new policy for the wikipedia for one situation of unique when all others are different? Then threat at me? Maybe I say something opposite to the ideas of what some of the peoples want? Okay maybe someone else will provide the better comment about this, if I should not, because may be I did not so good English. But I read it again what I write and I do not see the threat only the facts. But it is also gone away from there now. So I think this must be called censorship now? Mex-psych (talk) 22:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think it was censorship either. It's just that other editors did come close to making legal/professional threats, so people are a bit jumpy. Please put this down to a misunderstanding and nothing more. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 22:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, very kind persons who post here now. I will try not to help people jump. Which is a funny expression for certain! Several meanings for it! Mex-psych (talk) 22:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Jumpy? :D Or&mdash;Jittery, antsy, shaky, skittish, spooked, tense, nervous, agitated, all shook up. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs
 * My point was to educate and make MP aware so he didn't go to far. I'm surprised by the response of SV here. I would also ask you (MP) to stop writing "this is done respectfully" and the like, as where I'm from it's considered that the opposite is meant when it is stated so forthrightly. Verbal chat  08:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)