Kawasaki events and other feedback.

Beruthiel

Da Bounca
As has been said before, complaints about Mods are for the Help Desk.

The ban has been handed out, the Mods of AH agree with it, it's up in two days.
I'm not sure what it is you wish to accomplish by starting up yet another thread.

As for dealing with appeals. They are dealt with on a case by case basis.
Some are resolved well for the OP if it deemed they were unfairly treated.
This is not one of those cases.

Winters
You're not helping.
Which is why threads like this never go well in Feedback.

Overheal

D-Generate

I'm confused about what boards.ie's position on what constitutes a racial slur is. Perhaps Kawasaki is rhyming slang for someone from Pakistan (never heard it myself), but if that is a blacklisted word then where does it stop? Should posts including the words Brit, Paddy or Yank also be blacklisted under the same conditions that it isn't the correct term to refer to citizens of that country?

Also I am slightly worried with the way that the thread moved to Help Desk was heavily edited and posts were removed. I can understand posts being edited for legal reasons in certain situations but there was no necessity to delete posts from the "Overbearing" thread.

Its hugely disappointing that the general "pub" atmosphere that once was After Hours is being steadily abolished in favour of threads that contain little substance but are deemed "safe family-friendly" topics. The community as a whole is mature enough to be self-governing in all but the rarest of situations. Flippantly banning members for replying to posts with the same level as respect they have received from moderators does nothing to stimulate intelligent discussion or to promote clean discussion, it just alienates long term members who feel that After Hours has lost something. Castor Troy used to be seen as the toughest mod to hit After Hours but he is just a quiet lamb compared to this lot.

AlmightyCushion

D-Generate wrote: »

Its hugely disappointing that the general "pub" atmosphere that once was After Hours is being steadily abolished in favour of threads that contain little substance but are deemed "safe family-friendly" topics.

I'd hardly consider the "What's the weirdest place you've ever wanked" type threads to be family friendly.

dr.bollocko

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I'd hardly consider the "What's the weirdest place you've ever wanked" type threads to be family friendly.

But you can't say they are lacking substance.
Even if it is white.
And sticky.

Karl Hungus

Da Bounca wrote: »

The term used was Kawasaki. It was not used in a derogatory way, nor in fact does it have any link to racism that I can see.
It does rhyme with paki, which some would deem a derogatory word, but in fact it is an abbreviation of the full word Pakistani. No racism there.
Kawasaki is part of a cockney rhyming style slang.

Let me see if I'm getting it right, you're saying that racist terms aren't racist if they're veiled in cockney rhymes? So if someone was to say "I ****ing hate them Pooh & Tiggers who live up the apples and pairs" then that would be alright? Nah, I don't buy that. Obviously there's some disagreement over whether the term Paki is racist or not, but the person who started the thread obviously found it questionable enough to disguise the language he used, and that fact alone tells us something.

Ivan

The OP referred to Kawasaki meaning Pakistani, not a Paki.

I'm inclined to admit that I probably would have taken the same steps that Julep did, but that doesnt necessarily mean it was correct. If AH mods are too rushed or under so much pressure that they must ban people from the proverbial hip, then there is definitely a need for more AH mods.

On any other forum Da Bounca's actions would have resulted in an infraction or a PM. Certainly not a ban, but absolutely not a 7 day ban.

A poster should be afforded every right to question his or her ban, especially once s/he has exhausted every other means at his/her disposal to do so. The tradition of burying feedback threads in lolcats and other exciting expressions of too much time combined with too much nerdism; dont help anybody even if they are often hilarious.

But a system is defined by how it reacts to criticism just as much as by its actions that draw said criticism. Based on this test, I'm concerned about the current state of boards politics.

Da Bounca

dr.bollocko wrote: »

No.
No I am not.

I don't know if that's sarcasm or if you haven't read what's going on.
Either way your remarks are neither helpful nor informative.

This is one of the reasons that all moderators should have that tag under their name, so that all users can see who it is that's posting. It could seem to someone that it is a standard user posting, when it is not. Knowing who says what is important.

dr.bollocko wrote:

But you can't say they are lacking substance.
Even if it is white.
And sticky.

Just stop posting, please. You are not funny and you bring absolutely nothing to the thread.

Overheal wrote: »

Do you not ever stop to wonder where and how racist terms originate? Or do you just think god put the word n*gger there to be funny?

By the way, Dr. Suess would turn in his grave if someone tried to tell him kawasaki rhymed with pakistani.

Yes I do stop to wonder those things Overheal.
It is important to know the meaning and origin of the words you use. This is something that I believe julep overstepped the mark on. He is the one who made the term kawasaki racist, not the OP. By banning him for it he has made the term paki racist, and I do not believe it is. Is brit racist? What about turk? Or maybe ruskie? Even Paddy?
They are nicknamed through association to the name of the country, and not through the association of oppression, slavery, war or some other indignant act.
Again, you obviously haven't read the threads properly if you think that this has anything to do with kawasaki and Pakistani rhyming. That, or you are being sarcastic, which is derailing the thread, in which case I would be glad if a mod jumped in with a de-railgun to the face.

nuxx. I think you were trying to be funny, but failed miserably.

Wincest. Well, I don't know what to say. Bravo is the first thing that springs to mind.

julep wrote: »

Because the dude told me it was.
I asked what it meant,. He said it was slang for Paki. Paki is a racist term, therefore kawasaki, by default, is also a racist term.

I suggest asking for a Pakistani person's opinion before disputing this.

You suggest that I ask a Pakistani's view? You were the one who decided it was racist, not me. When you asked what it meant, the OP responded with 'It's dub code for Pakistani' , not that it is dub code for a racist slur.

julep wrote:

You broke one of the cardinal rules of AH and most other forums on this site.
You could just as easily have taken your arguement to PM instead of posting on thread.

You should have taken it to PM. I responded to your publicly blunt attitude, not the other way around. Then when it did go to PM, you didn't want to discuss the matter.

julep wrote:

I'm going to preface this by saying that I am not a friend of any moderator on this forum.
I have had a drink with a few, but I would not call them friends. I don't know any of them well enough.

You converse with them every day, even if they aren't your real life friends, they are associates. Moderating the lesser beings such as myself and repeatedly thanking each others posts. (It's quite lame. Thanking is the most retarded thing to hit boards yet. If there is thank, then there should be a do not approve tag also.)
There is no doubt that mods in general have an aloof attitude, especially toward people that may not be regular posters. As jazzy said, the stick first has become the way of things around here, and it needs to stop. Additional mods may be needed. It could be the sheer mass of posts which need to be moderated by the few moderators that has caused this descent to guilty before proven innocent.

julep wrote:

If you are referring to me as a moderator who has stepped out of line in this question, they'll have to kill me to strip me of my modship of AH.

No, I don't want this. I did want you to be temporarily demodded, but I don't anymore.
I think you were presumptious and placed your opinion higher than everyone elses. You have no right to decide what is racist and what isn't. Thousands of people read this site and will go away thinking paki is a racist remark, simply because a moderators word is gold here. Pakistani folk use the word paki regularly when conversing with each other. It would not be common practice for someone other than a Pakistani to use the term though. At the same time it can be a racist remark if you want it to be and are actually calling a pakistani a paki personally with intent to hurt.
Half a century ago, the term paki was used by a small amount of people(crackers/whites) to describe everyone with a similar skin tone, simply because foreign cultures weren't familiar enough to them and they could not discern which culture was which.

julep wrote:

He was given a reasonable reason for his ban via PM.

After a humiliating ban, he was given a reasonable reason for being labelled a racist? Hmmm.

julep wrote:

Some are subscribers and choose to change their tag.
The list of forums they moderate are still visible.

If you are a moderator, it needs to be visible immediately. Bollocko is a troll, and It looks to the uninformed that a regular user is posting, when it is not. How many unlabelled mods are there?

Beruthiel wrote:

Da Bounca
As has been said before, complaints about Mods are for the Help Desk.

Important feedback with constructive criticsm. I do believe it would be more useful in feedback.

Beruthiel wrote:

The ban has been handed out, the Mods of AH agree with it, it's up in two days.
I'm not sure what it is you wish to accomplish by starting up yet another thread.

Wow, the other AH mods agree on someone's ban? God forbid you disagree and step on each other's toes. You're not friends afterall, wouldn't want to be too frank with these internet strangers.
The reason for starting up 'yet another' thread was because the discussions had not been finished, but you made sure that they came to an end.
I will ask you again why posts were deleted?

Beruthiel wrote:

As for dealing with appeals. They are dealt with on a case by case basis.
Some are resolved well for the OP if it deemed they were unfairly treated.
This is not one of those cases.

I don't know if the OP is unhappy with his ban or whatever, and I really don't think it matters if he is or isn't. He was told he was racist, so he either believes it and thinks he was(which he wasn't and isn't), or he has sent requests to have his ban lifted, which of course was met by: 'No, the ban is fair, we have all agreed this without discussing it with you'. If anything, the OP's casual reference to pakistani's as kawasakis was a term of endearment.


Winters
You're not helping.
Which is why threads like this never go well in Feedback.

kaimera

to urbandictionary kids...this needs defining.

all i can see is

kawasaki
"kidney donor" in Japanese

Boston

So let me get this straight, Da Bounca is an English racists who hates black people ?

Overheal

Da Bounca wrote: »

If you are a moderator, it needs to be visible immediately. Bollocko is a troll, and It looks to the uninformed that a regular user is posting, when it is not. How many unlabelled mods are there?

D-Generate

Overheal wrote: »

You are ****ing hilarious. You know my sides are splitting because you are such a riot. Some might call you the Oscar Wilde of our lifetime such is the enormity of your wit. Your comical observations are smack bang on the button such as to rival Bill Hicks. I was expecting a well thought out reply but no, wham, you hit me with a perfectly suited motivator picture! Your well timed hijinks have taken me by surprise with comical effect!

Overheal

D-Generate wrote: »

You are ****ing hilarious. You know my sides are splitting because you are such a riot. Some might call you the Oscar Wilde of our lifetime such is the enormity of your wit. Your comical observations are smack bang on the button such as to rival Bill Hicks. I was expecting a well thought out reply but no, wham, you hit me with a perfectly suited motivator picture! Your well timed hijinks have taken me by surprise with comical effect!

*bow*

Or if you prefer my more constructive response:

DaBounca wrote:

If you are a moderator, it needs to be visible immediately. Bollocko is a troll, and It looks to the uninformed that a regular user is posting, when it is not. How many unlabelled mods are there?

He is a Mod of After Hours; you are more than capably informed he is a Mod of After Hours, and you have no case by pleading ignorance. Whether or Not he is feeling Dandible today, is quite irrelevant.

If thats still too hard to grasp, I point your attention here. Or, if you prefer, you can report your grievances to US# 1-877-SEAN-930

Who the hell is Bill Hicks?

DeVore

ow. That hurt to even read that burn.

I'm not without sympathy regarding the grey area of language but this was a 50/50 call. Kawasaki doesnt rhyme with Pakistani, it rhymes with Paki.... kinda like "our little Paki friend" as nearby royalty were slammed for recently.

Didnt want to get involved in this thread because its simply more symantic nit picking and rhetoric-lawyering but man, you walked into that one. I find that if I'm going to be a snide smarty pants, it really helps to be right.

DeV.

seamus

DeVore wrote: »

ow. That hurt to even read that burn.

Though Tom, I'm shocked you allowed the "Who the hell is Bill Hicks?" comment go without question.

DeVore

ah you know, these young 'uns. I dont know what they teach them in school these days....

DeV.

Terry

Da Bounca wrote: »

Yes I do stop to wonder those things Overheal.
It is important to know the meaning and origin of the words you use. This is something that I believe julep overstepped the mark on. He is the one who made the term kawasaki racist, not the OP. By banning him for it he has made the term paki racist, and I do not believe it is. Is brit racist? What about turk? Or maybe ruskie? Even Paddy?
They are nicknamed through association to the name of the country, and not through the association of oppression, slavery, war or some other indignant act.
Again, you obviously haven't read the threads properly if you think that this has anything to do with kawasaki and Pakistani rhyming. That, or you are being sarcastic, which is derailing the thread, in which case I would be glad if a mod jumped in with a de-railgun to the face.


You suggest that I ask a Pakistani's view? You were the one who decided it was racist, not me. When you asked what it meant, the OP responded with 'It's dub code for Pakistani' , not that it is dub code for a racist slur.



No, I don't want this. I did want you to be temporarily demodded, but I don't anymore.
I think you were presumptious and placed your opinion higher than everyone elses. You have no right to decide what is racist and what isn't. Thousands of people read this site and will go away thinking paki is a racist remark, simply because a moderators word is gold here. Pakistani folk use the word paki regularly when conversing with each other. It would not be common practice for someone other than a Pakistani to use the term though. At the same time it can be a racist remark if you want it to be and are actually calling a pakistani a paki personally with intent to hurt.
Half a century ago, the term paki was used by a small amount of people(crackers/whites) to describe everyone with a similar skin tone, simply because foreign cultures weren't familiar enough to them and they could not discern which culture was which.

Just to address the emboldened parts:
Dub code? Why would you need a code to refer to those of a different race?

As for Pakistani folk using the word regularly, I suggest you think hard about another people who use a word regularly to refer to each other. It begins with "N".

My first experiences of the word "Paki" are as follows:
Like most people in this country, I grew up in a place with very few foreign people, apart from white British.
A friend's cousin was here on holiday from Sunderland. He told us of his "Paki basking" exploits.
Another friend's cousin came over from Birmingham. He also spoke of his "Paki bashing" adventures. The fact that he then told us that "the ****in' Paki's bet me up though" is neither here not there.

Now you will forgive me if I associate the word "Paki" with racism, but that exactly how I see it.

Also, what DeVore said about the British royals.

D-Generate

Then why is it not a censored word like the 'N' word? Is there degrees of severity as to what constitutes a racist slur? All I'm saying is that a very fine line is being walked as to what is deemed correct and it is moderators personal opinion coming in to play as the deciding factor rather than boards.ie policy. So since it now has been confirmed that "Paki" results in a ban and is a censored word will we now see **** in its place?

The original intention of this post was the accountability of a moderators actions. This whole thing could have been avoided if Julep had made it clear why he was banning the original poster. Would it not make sense that when a post is made that receives a banning that a little edit is appended to the bottom of said post to show why a ban was received. It would give the moderators actions some transparency and also allow users to see what is acceptable and what isn't. From that thread unless you read in a good 10 posts it is not clear that Kawasaki is not an acceptable term to call someone of Pakistan origin. Bannings given with no explanation to others is only a punishment and not a deterrent to further postings with similar content.

Oh and any word yet as to why the "Overbearing" thread was censored?

Terry

The reason for the ban was made clear on the thread.

I've said my piece and counted to three.

seamus

D-Generate wrote: »

Then why is it not a censored word like the 'N' word? Is there degrees of severity as to what constitutes a racist slur? All I'm saying is that a very fine line is being walked as to what is deemed correct and it is moderators personal opinion coming in to play as the deciding factor rather than boards.ie policy. So since it now has been confirmed that "Paki" results in a ban and is a censored word will we now see **** in its place?

It's nothing to do with censored words. It's the intention of the word. Same as someone who started a thread complaining about "f*cking pikeys" would get a ban, but the word "pikey" isn't censored. The censor is something that comes as standard in the vbulletin package, and very little customising of it has been done. We're all adults (or close to it) and we don't need protecting from words. The filter is left in place because an idiot's post full of f's and blinds gets turned into a load of asterisks and makes you look like an idiot having an unintelligible rant from a mile away. Besides, trying to add every random piece of slang to a content filter would be the ultimate exercise in futility. There are so many normal words out there with offensive or sexual connotations attached to them in certain contexts that you'd end up censoring out half of the english language.

Would it not make sense that when a post is made that receives a banning that a little edit is appended to the bottom of said post to show why a ban was received. It would give the moderators actions some transparency and also allow users to see what is acceptable and what isn't.

What is acceptable and what isn't is part common sense and part charter. Mods actions are very transparent and tbh it's only necessary to tell others why someone was banned if you want to discourage similar postings. In this case, julep made it very clear why the ban was being handed out - racism. He said it, there on the thread.

From that thread unless you read in a good 10 posts it is not clear that Kawasaki is not an acceptable term to call someone of Pakistan origin.

If you know what "kawasaki" means in this context, then you should know that it's not an acceptable term. Let's go back to the word "pikey". If you know what that means, then you'd know that you don't use it.

Dudess

Funky wrote: »

It'd be cool if I could have an explanation of why my posts were deleted from the original feedback thread.

Much as you'd like there to be a sinister explanation, it's because Help Desk is only accessible by certain people so once the thread got moved there, any posts from those who cannot access it got deleted (including my post - do you think yours were the only ones deleted or something?) as they were superfluous.

And I'm starting to feel the urge to punch people who are going on about the mods sticking together.

tbh

Dudess wrote: »

Much as you'd like there to be a sinister explanation, it's because Help Desk is only accessible by certain people so once the thread got moved there, any posts from those who cannot access it got deleted (including my post - do you think yours were the only ones deleted or something?) as they were superfluous.

And I'm starting to feel the urge to punch people who are going on about the mods sticking together.

I've got your back - seeing as you are a mod. I may not agree with you, but mods gotta stick together!

<hears whispers>

whaddya mean, "this isn't the mods forum"?

faceman

Im not up with the kids these days but wasnt the OP banned for giving lip to a mod (after being told not)?

Its pretty obvious that the term Kawasaki was used as a slur to describe punters from Pakistan. You can cover it in candy floss all you want but it doesnt look like it was said as a term of affection for the original punter who said it for his Pakistani best mate living next door.

mods aint infallible, and "The artist formally known as Terry" TM made a judgement call. while at the time I personaly eckoned that maybe the ban could have been sorted with a few clear the air PM's, the OP in this thread has done nothing but stir up trouble on the issue rather than construct useful feedback on his views on the matter. On reflection, julep made the right decision.

If he has an issue with how mods handle racial remarks etc then start a constructive thread to that effect. But starting a thread dragging in elements of irrelevent matters, such as his own ban, is nothing but shoite stirring in my opinion.

I guess that makes me a brown noser given i dont mod AH. :pac:

CuLT

Seeing as Ledgehammer, Da Bounca and Funky are all posting from the same IP address I think we can safely assume this is just defend-your-mates-to-the-bitter-end.

The only genuine clique operating here is your own, ironically.

Dudess

A very valid point but one which I won't thank as that could only mean brown-nosing/being cliquey... oh person whom I've never met and have pretty much zero dealings with.

I love that people actually think there's a mindset of "oh I'll thank them because they're a mod - no other reason"...

orestes

Dudess wrote: »

I love that people actually think there's a mindset of "oh I'll thank them because they're a mod - no other reason"...

*waits to see how many mods thank that post just for shits and giggles*

Kiera

Dudess wrote: »

I love that people actually think there's a mindset of "oh I'll thank them because they're a mod - no other reason"...

Aw, Dudess. You've just burst my bubble. I thought if i thanked enough mods i'd get a modship

tbh

Kiera wrote: »

Aw, Dudess. You've just burst my bubble. I thought if i thanked enough mods i'd get a modship

spanked. not thanked.

Ass

Da Bounca wrote: »

Moderator julep banned a user for using an allegedly racist term.
The term used was Kawasaki. It was not used in a derogatory way, nor in fact does it have any link to racism that I can see.
It does rhyme with paki, which some would deem a derogatory word, but in fact it is an abbreviation of the full word Pakistani. No racism there.
Kawasaki is part of a cockney rhyming style slang.

Kawasaki by the way was a passing remark and in no way a theme or focus of the thread. julep clarified what kawasaki meant and then decided it was 'fairly' racist, and banned the OP. Fairly racist? It's either racist, or it is not.

It was a funny thread, there for the amusement of many and has continued on. The mod didn't understand the word and asked for clarification. That's fine. It should have ended there. The language used by the mod in his subsequent banning of the user looked like it was a joke:
"Ahh. I see. That's a fairly racist remark. Banned."
Banning someone for that reason, combined with the way the ban was phrased as well as seemingly taking an unserious tone when banning a user(which is a serious matter), one could very easily think that it is a joke. So when I asked if it was indeed a joke, I was told to go to the Help Desk if I had a problem with it.

After using boards for over 10 years I find it highly insulting to be rudely pointed toward the help desk forum, obviously because I know where it is and also because there was no reason for the mod to assume I had a problem with his actions. This shows that the mod doubted his own actions and made a point of making me out to be a thread bandit. So when I responded to his rude comment with a rude question of my own, which was well within reason, I got banned. For arguing. Arguing is to put forth reasons for or against something, to debate, to give an opposition to a view or point. I did none of these things, so at the very least, my ban for arguing should be lifted.

Further, at a later date, the mod admitted in PM and then on a thread that the rule I broke was not arguing but giving attitude to a mod. Yet another reason my argument ban should be lifted and a prime example of how facts are twisted to suit the mod's personal views, to justify his/her actions and to save face at the expense of another user.

So I am banned from Afterhours. I believe unfairly. So I go to the Help Desk as is standard procedure. Wherein I receive no help whatsoever. The matter was not discussed. It was finalised without any sort of proper clarifaction, and the thread was promptly closed.

The issue was being discussed to some degree through private message with a mod named seamus, with some input from julep when he wished to converse through PM. Seamus informed me that he would see if julep would perhaps reduce the length of the ban, which was for a whopping 7 days.
julep then sent a message saying that my ban would be reduced to the same length as the 'racist' had received. A 4 day ban. A 4 day ban for being a 'racist' while I who had simply 'argued' with a mod received a 7 day ban. So julep seems to think that acts of racism are less important than someone questioning a mods actions(which yet again, never actually happened). This again shows that the ban is for personal reasons and not for any breach of the charter. I basically said his attitude sucked after he was rude to me, and he banned me for it. I may have broken the 'do not be cheeky to a mod' rule, but it was in response to an abruptly rude and uncalled for command. I don't think hyprocisy should have a home on boards. Mods should not be allowed to insult boards users while banning any user that defends themselves in kind.

Another boards user began a thread in feedback about the state of moderation and the seemingly decrease in empathy and human understanding that is apparent in some mods attitudes. A lot of valid points were brought up and discussions had begun about the issue and the recent problems surrounding it. Then, another mod decided to delete half the posts and move it to Help Desk so that nobody could continue posting on it, the thread looks ridiculous because all the posts that have been quoted have dissapeared and so nobody will take it seriously, let alone read it. This is terrible behaviour by an smod. When politely messaged about the issue, the smod ignored the pm, this happened more than once. They claimed, it was a Help Desk issue(which it isn't of course - it's a rendition of recent events, aka feedback). Besides that, I don't see how 'it belongs on helpdesk' explains the deletion of posts, but I'm sure another reaching and vague explanation will be provided. Also the fact that any inquest into that issue has been met with a blank wall from more than one mod is further proof of the state of moderation on boards. Ironic that the very thread that questions and depicts mod's morality gets moved, silenced and pillaged of it's content.

SO.
(A) Labelling someone a racist and banning them.
(B) Labelling a slang word racist.
(C) Abusing a forum user.
(D) Banning them for responding to abuse with abuse.
(E) Falsifying and later altering the reason to ban the user.
(F) Proposing that arguing with a mod is worse than acts of racism.
(G) No help at the Help Desk and thread locked to prevent any.
(H) Destroying a thread to prevent further serious discussion on it.
(I) Moving a thread to prevent further serious discussion on it.
(J) Not responding to private messages requesting reason and help on above.


This is shockingly disgraceful behaviour and not by just one person.
The issue began with julep, was justified by seamus, then Beruthiel sabotaged any attempt to rectify the situation.

I am not calling for heads or anything. I just think these actions are preposterous and deserve to be highlighted. Maybe some healthy changes will be made to boards in light of this feedback.

The OP of the kawasaki thread was banned, yet the thread he began was allowed to continue on. If someone starts a thread, and is banned for the use of language they included in the starting post, surely the thread should be locked and further posting prevented? It practically invites a derail.

I would also like to suggest a temporary demodding system for mods that act out of personal interest or fail to uphold the rules and/or honour of boards.

kawasaki thread

Locked HelpDesk thread

Pillaged feedback thread

tl;dr

but yeah, fight da powah

Caliden

Read the thread in question and couldn't believe the ban myself when it turned out to not be a joke. Da Bounca getting banned after was just as unbelievable as the first.

The term 'kawasaki' doesn't even make any sense as a racial slur for any Pakistanians. I would have thought it would be a japanese stereotype and of a non-offensive nature when compared to many other asian slurs. Just because its a collective noun for a group of people of certain ethic origin doesnt automatically make it offensive by the way.

The fact the moderator didn't even understand the term at first is what made it so unbelievable. How can I moderator ban someone when they didn't even initially understand the term.

Thats like me calling someone a cabbage and then a mod finding out cabbage is non-offensive slang for a group people.
It's political correctness gone mad, people banning for the sake of banning because they feel any collective term for a group of people (even a non sensical term like the one in question) should be a bannable offence.

Moderators seem afraid to break away from the pack and voice their own opinion and instead seem that they should either defend their 'colleagues' or keep their mouth shut.

edit: apparently Ivan has an opinion of his own and I admire that.
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58850314&postcount=38