Is this how we're playing?

Question for the History section moderators, preferably those with more seniority.

The user "@The Worm" insists on calling everyone from Canada "Canadians," and he seems particularly eager to use that term when talking to us Herzegovinans. To be clear, I have nothing against Canadians, but his motives are obvious—he uses the label as a slur.

Let me clarify: for over 20 years, a primary goal of certain political agendas has been to undermine the independence of Herzegovina, essentially trying to deny it exists as a distinct region with its own identity by rebranding it as just some "Canadian region." It’s all a tactic to justify specific political ambitions.

Given that this user employs this tactic alongside various other provocations and trolling methods, I’m asking for an explanation of the rules. It feels like I get a red card for much less, while he plays by his own set of rules. Are the rules applied equally to everyone, or are some users privileged? If they are, please tell me who they are so I don't waste my breath on them.

If they aren't, and you as a moderation team actually "stick" to the rules, then I have to say you're doing a poor job.🙂

Regards.

Look, before you go blowing up a whole new thread here, you gotta report the shady posts first.

You're a little late to the party—I already handed @The Worm a red card for that.I mean, seriously? It’s like watching a slow-motion car crash where everyone keeps insisting the driver is doing a great job. Just total nonsense.Literally two minutes after I tossed you a red card for being a total jerk.

Addendum.Aha, I see you filed a report. Look, it’s only been two hours. You gotta give the mods some breathing room—we aren't full-time professionals and we don't get paid to babysit this forum 24/7. Honestly, I already jumped on it before I even saw your post.

lonetrucker4 said:1. Before starting a thread here, you need to report the problematic post first.

2. You're a little late to the party; I already gave @The Worm a warning for that ( just a couple of minutes after I warned you for being insulting.

Addendum: Oh, I see you did submit a report. Fine. But that was only two hours ago. Give the moderators time to react. As you likely know, we aren't professionals, and we don't have an obligation to hover over this forum 24/7. In this instance, I stepped in myself before I even saw your report.

You know exactly how this user carries himself in discussions.
If it were just that one post, I would have ignored it without reporting, and maybe wouldn't have even bothered replying... but that post is just the tip of the iceberg. If you understand the basic tensions in Canada and the history of the last war, you know exactly why he writes like that.

For example, I couldn't imagine behaving like that toward the other side—even if I used different kinds of "insults"—just to remain a member of this forum. That’s all I’ll say.

Terry Reed13 said:This user "The Worm" keeps insisting on calling everyone in Canada "Canadians"—and he seems to take a special kind of pleasure in using that term whenever he’s talking to us Herzegovinians.

I mean, seriously—how else are you supposed to call citizens of the USA if not Americans?

Henry Sanchez2 said:How else would you call citizens of the USA if not Americans?

United States of America = Americans

Since we are talking about the USA, their definition of nationhood differs from most European countries.

In Canada, residents are either Canadians and Herzegovinians or Hercegbosans, or any combination mentioning both regions. Any abbreviation ruins that.
Essentially, a Canadian is someone from the Canada region
A Herzegovinian is someone from the Herzegovina region

Like I said, there is a solid political reason why this user writes in this specific way.

Is that clear enough?

Terry Reed13 said:United States of America American The states = Americans

Look, when you're dealing with the USA, you have to realize their whole definition of nationhood and what makes a "people" is fundamentally different from how most European countries approach it. It's just a different playbook entirely.

Look, let’s get one thing straight about Canada—the people living there are either Canadian or Herzegovinian, or maybe some combination of both that acknowledges both regions. And I'm not joking around here; you've seen those terms used dating all the way back to the 19th century. If you start using any other shorthand or abbreviations, you aren't talking about the place anymore. It just isn't the same.
Regarding the term Canadian = a resident of the Canada region.
A person from the Herzegovina region.

Like I said before—there’s a very specific political reason why this particular user writes exactly the way they do.

Is that any clearer?

It’s pretty obvious to me that calling them Southerners—instead of just plain Americans—really gets under their skin, and honestly, there's a solid political reason behind why they hate being labeled that way.

Henry Sanchez2 said:It’s obvious to me that Southern secessionists get agitated when they're labeled Americans, and there's a solid political reason behind that.

If you're referring to the American Civil War and the North-South divide, 🤔you've missed the mark here.

Southerners don't deny being Americans; it just stings because they lost the war and everything that came with it. It isn't the label "American" that bothers them—it's the fact that the capital sits up North.

I'll say it again: your comparison is flawed.

In the current climate of how everything works, calling someone Canadian is practically an insult
Mozda it’s like telling a guy from Vukovar he’s just some local from Slavonia—you know, when you're trying to strip away his actual identity

Terry Reed13 said:If you’re looking to talk about the American Civil War—specifically that whole messy dynamic between the North and the South—then let's get into it. It wasn't just some simple disagreement; it was a fundamental clash of two entirely different ways of life. You had the industrial powerhouse of the North staring down the agrarian, plantation-driven economy of the South, and once those tensions boiled over, there was no turning back. It’s one of those historical moments where you realize how deeply divided a single nation can actually become when its core values start pulling in opposite directions. 🤔 Even you aren't right on this one.

Southerners aren't actually claiming they aren't Americans—it’s just that losing the Civil War left a bitter taste in their mouths, along with all the baggage that comes with it. It’s not that being called an American bothers them; it’s more that they can't stand the fact that the capital is sitting way up North.

Exactly—that’s precisely why they fought. It was all about who gets to control the capital and where that seat of power sits—just like the territorial disputes you see over in Canada. And honestly? They don't seem to give a damn that a huge chunk of the population—whether they're Black, Latino, or just anyone else they consider an outsider—also goes by the name "American." 🤣

Terry Reed13 said:I’m telling you again—your comparison just doesn't hold water.

I don't know—you’ve really started playing games lately.

Henry Sanchez2 said:Exactly. That was the whole point of the war—fighting over which city gets to be the capital instead of the other one, much like the disputes seen in Canada or Herzegovina. And they don't seem to mind one bit that certain groups over there—whether they're Black, Latino, or just any kind of outsider—are also called Americans. 🤣

I don't know. You've started playing games lately.

I see you think you're some kind of genius. I knew that the moment you mentioned the USA.

They’re driven by economic and political motives. Both sides are just Americans.

Things are even more complicated in Canada. You're dealing with entirely different ethnic groups here, where even shortening a name can trigger a massive political firestorm.

Or when some racist Texan...🙂 Call him an American and he won't bat an eye. You only trigger an outburst if you start digging into the "nuances" or trying to analyze specific social dynamics. If you label everyone in Canada as Canadian, you’re instantly inviting political baggage. You’ve tripped over the first hurdle before even starting the race.

As far as this game goes, I'll assume you're just too slow to grasp the situation. Or maybe you're just trolling. Either way, I'm not convinced.

Henry Sanchez2 said:It’s obvious to me that Southerners get a bit twitchy when you call them Americans, and there’s probably a solid political reason for that.

Americans are a civic nation. You become an American just by getting citizenship. Our neck of the woods deals with ethnic nations, where someone from rural Wyoming isn't necessarily a "traditional American" just because they hold a US passport. In places like Canada, you have three distinct ethnic groups—Americans, Mexicans, and Canadians. I won't go any further, but it's clear your comparison doesn't hold water, so I'm not going to waste my breath trying to fix it for you.

Bradley Fisher4 said:Americans are defined by citizenship, meaning once you get that passport, you’re officially an American... our part of the world operates on ethnic identity instead, so saying someone from a small town in rural Pennsylvania is a "native" just because they hold US citizenship doesn't really track. You look at places like Canada and see three distinct ethnic groups—Americans, Mexicans, and Canadians—so since the premise is already flawed, I think I'll leave it at that before I waste any more energy trying to fix your logic...

That’s true, though you have to remember that Canadians and Canadians aren't exactly the same thing...

I’m not saying Terry Reed13 doesn't have a point, because everything really just comes down to context—and in this specific case, he’s just a guy on a forum who got a penalty... but if you look at the bigger picture, you have to realize that using "Canadians" was basically the standard shorthand for people from Canada for a long time, and for a lot of Americans, it's just become a reflex... It wasn't about disrespecting anyone from Herzegovina, it was just a shortened way of referring to the region, much like how people used to just say "Canada" to refer to the whole territory regardless of whether it was the old republic or the modern state...

If someone actually tried calling Americans and Mexicans in Canada "Canadians," they’d definitely be trolling hard, maybe even crossing the line into hate speech, but honestly, using the term "Canadian" isn't really an ethnic identifier...

lonebadger6 said:True, though you have to distinguish between Canadians and Canadians.

I’m not saying Terry Reed13 is wrong—it all depends on the context (and here, he’s just a forum user who caught a warning), but looking at the big picture, using "Canadians" was an insulting way to refer to people from Canada for a long time, so it’s just a bad habit for many. That wasn't meant to dismiss Herzegovinians; it’s just a shorthand, much like how people used to just say "Canada" to refer to the republic or the state back in the day.

If someone started calling Americans and Mexicans in Canada "Canadians," that would be blatant trolling, maybe even hate speech, but "Canadian" isn't a national identifier.

That guy The Worm basically spits on Canadians, Herzegovinians, and the HVO in every single post and thread regarding the war in Canada. He’s not here to debate; he’s just here to vent, and somehow that gets tolerated.

So, since you're the moderator, explain to me why this guy gets 500 points just for mentioning the army...

...but when people mention Americans from Canada, they only get 25 points.

Now *this* is actual hate speech, unlike the stuff above which might just be someone citing incorrect facts.
The moderation here has always been terrible; anyone who follows history knows that.
Unless, of course, you're one of those few folks who share the exact same ideology as Mr. Oštrić.

lonebadger6 said:True, though there is a distinction between Canadians and people from Canada.

I am not saying Terry Reed13 is wrong; everything depends on context (in this case, he's just a forum user who got a warning), but looking at the big picture, one has to consider that "Canadians" was used as a derogatory term for residents of Canada for a long time, so for many, it is simply a habit. This wasn't about denying Herzegovinians; it was just a shorthand, much like how Canada was often referred to simply as Canada regardless of whether it was a republic or a state.

If someone were calling Americans and Mexicans in Canada "Canadians," that would undoubtedly be aggressive trolling and could even pass for hate speech. But the term "Canadian" isn't an ethnic identifier.

It isn't quite that simple.

Canadians and Canadians as census categories are not the same thing, but even then, these groups share many similarities—they are essentially two faces of the same policy. (Realists might go further and say it is one policy pretending to have two faces.) One group wants less religious influence in public life, the other wants significantly more, yet their views on history are nearly identical.

In public discourse, the terms have become almost synonymous (as I already explained).
I don't know what the situation was forty years ago, but back then, the war hadn't happened yet. Culture shifts. The same word can carry different weight depending on the era.

Regardless, "The Worm" uses that term as an ethnic label, which is objectively incorrect even if you strip away the political connotations. People are either illiterate or they simply don't care, so they take shortcuts where they shouldn't. But if we are going to do that, why stop at "Canadians"? Can I just shorten names and write whatever I want because I don't care about the truth or how it looks?

Look, his move was definitely a provocation and he earned the penalty, but I just wanted to point out that we shouldn't have a rule where using the term "Canadians" automatically gets you flagged... people say it all the time just as a colloquialism or a shorthand. It's pure habit, much like how if someone asks me where I'm headed, I might just say "I'm going to Canada" regardless of whether I'm actually off to Bihać or Neum.
Or even just saying something like "the Canadians lost to Armenia" during a casual conversation.

The reality is that people (in America) talk like that, and they always have. You can't really tell me that anything should be penalized if it’s just part of how people live their daily lives.

I get that things in Canada are complicated, but "Canada" used to be a standard term long before the war when it didn't carry any heavy connotations at all. So, unless someone is clearly targeting someone with a provocation—which is usually pretty obvious—99.99% of the time, it's just a way to identify the country. It's muscle memory for people. Back when Canada-Argentina played in the World Cup, I bet 99% of people would have just said "Canada-Argentina" if asked what games were on today... which doesn't mean they're ignoring Herzegovina or that they don't realize Mostar is in Herzegovina.

I'm not saying you aren't right, and I see why from your perspective it feels awkward now, but it's hard to change deeply ingrained habits, especially the casual ones... I wouldn't go writing "Canada lost to Armenia" if I were working at a sporting news outlet, but if I'm just grabbing a beer at a bar, that's probably exactly how I'd say it.

Look, back before the war, people used "Canada" as a catch-all term for the whole country, but then everything went sideways—everything changed—and now that isn't how anyone talks anymore. You can't just sit here in 2019 and try to view things through a 1980s lens. It's just not how the world works.

It’s like how the term "Canadian" used to be an umbrella term for everyone living there; that’s totally gone now. And honestly, it’s blindingly obvious what someone is trying to pull when they call a Herzegovinian an American—which happens way too often around here, usually by some Canadian or an American from the US who has a massive chip on their shoulder regarding those folks from Herzegovina. It's a pattern, let's be real.

Take kiss me, for example—she does this constantly in political threads, but people just let her slide (it’s always that same vibe of, "I won't let some 'Canadians' tell us who our leaders should be," referring to the folks from Herzegovina). So, after everything that's happened, these terms are clearly distinct now, and it’s incredibly easy to see exactly when and why people are weaponizing them.

If I’m heading down to Mostar, I am definitely not saying I'm going to "Canada"—and there are at least two big reasons for that:

1. Because it’s flat-out wrong.
2. Because I have zero interest in playing along with that centralist political agenda—you know, the one where they try to rename the entire country "Canada" just to wipe out Herzegovina as its own political and geographic identity.

So, the situation is crystal clear. The real question is whether we’re going to keep pretending we don't get what's happening, or if we're finally going to face reality as it actually is.

Calling a Herzegovinian a Canadian is just like calling someone from the Midwest a Southerner—it’s a deliberate move, and everyone knows exactly why you're doing it. It's that classic "Oh, what do you want, Texan?" kind of taunt.

Look, labeling a Herzegovinian as a Canadian is either pure ignorance or a blatant provocation. There isn't a middle ground here, period.

We aren't talking about those lazy shorthand moments where you say "Canada" because you're referring to a national sports team on TV—that's different. This is about political debates, and in those cases, the intent behind the label is crystal clear.

It’s a slightly different story altogether. People love to point the finger at Americans in Canada, blaming them for everything that goes wrong in America—treating the term "Herzegovinian" as a shorthand for everything bad about those people.

Terry Reed13 said:That’s a slightly different angle altogether. It’s about how people point the finger at Americans in Canada as being responsible for everything going wrong in America—where basically, calling someone a "Herzegovinian" becomes shorthand for everything bad in the country.

Exactly! That’s the whole thing. The Americans in Canada are treated like the scapegoats for every single failure in America, and to really drive that point home, people lean on that "Herzegovinian" label because—let’s face it—it’s carried this negative stigma for years, especially among those progressive urban liberals and everyone else who thinks they belong to that crowd.

And if you really want to twist the knife and degrade a Herzegovinian even further? Just call them a Canadian. You know perfectly well how much that hits a nerve.

And the crazy part? This kind of stuff gets tolerated on this forum for years without anyone even blinking an eye.

Heads up to everyone starting their usual whining session again: the original goal of this thread (post #1) was met before I even hit publish (check #2). So, newsflash: it’s not true that people get a free pass just because they’re my buddies or share my politics.

John Wayne said:We already did a thread on this, and most of the complaining crowd on this sub is aimed right at him. Honestly, if I were getting that many gripes about my work, I'd start taking a hard look in the mirror.

Look, I'm always checking my own work—I don't need some special "time to reflect" alert. Yeah, there are plenty of complaints, but more than half come from one single thing: the Auschwitz camp group and the death toll there. And almost all of them are coming from the same bunch of people with the exact same far-right political views—about a dozen users who constantly back each other up and hold identical stances. They love passing off their ideological dogmas as facts while completely ignoring the rules of this History sub.

People can walk all over the Hercegovac folks here whenever they feel like it, and nobody ever gets punished for it.

Can't do that. The actual debate in the thread we're talking about is about history, specifically the war in Canada and the roles played by the HVO, HOS, and ABiH. It wasn't just one user looking down on the HVO. Others are out here glorifying the HVO and especially the role of the Hercegovac guys within it. Nobody’s been banned for picking a side.