In case of Sergi/Punkcat, it appears that he does direct to cases what he considers are representing something he doesn't like.
Lets say when guys like Punkcat makes statements againts such labels like "filth & violence" or "freak animal" and make accusation of sexism, racism, fascism, etc. one can't perhaps call it "totally unfounded"? Perhaps few bands are getting lumped together in unwanted group, or few far fetched assumptions are made about bands who hardly qualify among bigoted boneheads, but still...
Redvenice is different case, and appears to have a lot of do with UK scene internal issues I wish to not take part of, hah.. Anyways, those who don't know, he has been exposed to be guy who caused irritation for several people, making accusations and posting articles, simply to give trouble to people involved, to get other peoples noise gigs cancelled etc.
Why I consider drama surrounding this kind of things quite unnecessary, is that what is its relevance? Within the "scene", most people would know Unrest or mentioned labels. Probably know many of bands associated with labels. I believe they are known & supported worldwide. If some relatively unknown guy with his FB profile post few message, so what? Vast majority of people wouldn't even know about these incidents unless they are given attention. You know. Someone said something at facebook?! jeesus.
Surely couple occasions where something annoying happened, gigs gets cancelled for this type of bullshit. But overall, there's nothing happening what couldn't solved by simply not following on guys postings somewhere in the internet. What I assume is the case already with vast majority of people anyways.
I believe there are pretty good examples of bands who react on all sorts of negative feedback or accusations found online and are ready to "clear things out". What has been EVER gained with that? Well, sort of little coffeebreak worth of amusement for by-standers, hah, but I think energy can be spent for something more creative too.
