Holy crap Moses, "like the good Nazis"? Our volunteers that work for the SIG try and do their best to try and improve our lives by singling out pairings that make our lives more difficult and have to work with the our contract, FAR's, etc. to do this. They all have to agree on parameters they feel do this and highlight these pairings to the best of their ability. Unless they have dissenting views within their group on what these parameters are these pairings will continue to be what they are. Simply complaining about these trips and rationalizing why one should fly it while the majority of pilots choose to believe they are doing their jobs is wrong.
I agree that the MAN/STN leg is not that fatiguing and that the rest of the trip is awesome but we need to understand that by allowing the company to use an RFO to simply extend a duty day to include an additional leg will lead to this becoming a norm. For example, ANC pilots would be flying from ANC to and Asia location then continuing on to another city every time they took off and then the same in reverse. This would be brutal. We need to look at the big picture and just because we think that one leg is not that bad doesn't make it ok to fly it.
Three months of us NOT volunteering for such a pairing would eliminate it from the schedule, add a layover, and add to more flying and pay for us all. This in my opinion would greatly improve our quality of life.
If one of us truly feels that the decisions the hard working volunteers in the SIG are wrong then they should volunteer themselves to work with SIG and make their opinions heard. Complaining here on this forum then flying the disputed pairings will do nothing to improve the lives of us all.