You're right, I did act like a loser, I felt bad about it, and I apologized for it. I just came to voice my opinion because I too have noticed that a certain group of editors have been networking their GA nominated articles amongst themselves. I am also aware of some of the sub-par reviewing practices being conducted by a few of the accused, so I have provided examples as proof of what I'm talking about. For a reviewer to not give the nominator a chance to address concerns brought forth in their review is both wrong and not fair. To review a GAN article it would benefit an editor to have a good understanding of what they're reviewing for before they start. I've seen some very questionable articles being accepted as GA by a few of the editors included in this group, that's all.  (meow)