Um, how does Dalmont's look remotely like a trade station? The outside looks like a really amazing generic space outpost, and the inside looks like an awesome abandoned alien military environmental training facility.
Yeah. Still wonder why my station got so many votes (thank you guys for voting!) even though it doesn't fit to Trade Guild category, and it was meant to be abandoned station xD
Not the issue; I'd respect different design tastes if that's all it was. However, it seems like some people didn't even actually look at the stations besides in the tiny little thumbnails on the topic...
This clearly indicates misreading. He wasn't criticizing people for having different aesthetic preference from his, he was criticizing the fact that, as he and I have stated at least three times at this point, probably, it seems as though most of the voters didn't actually go into the game and take a proper look at the stations before voting for them.
That doesn't change the point that they went into an all caps, multi-line spam about how stupid they think the voters are.
You have absolutely no reading comprehension, sense of humor, or common sense. This is hyperbole/humor:
This is the point I am making:
I don't care at all what people's aesthetic preferences are. My problem is that people are not voting on stations, but on low-quality thumbnails, many of which do not represent the stations accurately, making several poorly-done stations look excellent, and several excellent stations look crappy. These inaccurate thumbnails are clearly and distinctly represented in the votes, which anyone who actually visited the stations can see.
This is absolutely right.
There you go again, insulting builds and making rude assumptions about whether or not people actually looked at some of the entries. Stop trying to play off how much of a jerk you've been. Spamming "STUPID PEOPLE!" 13 times isn't a joke, it's just obnoxious and clearly shows what you think of the people who voted differently.
Looks like we just have a different sense of humor. Congrats on the first remotely civil comment in some time, though.
Stations with inaccurate thumbnails were clearly dragged down in relation to stations that in actuality are extremely similar in their style and detailing. This is not an assumption, but an inference from the facts. At least call it a "rude inference" if you take exception to it, and make a sound argument against its accuracy!
A small disparity in votes would indicate aesthetic preference between similar stations, which is to be expected. I see a large disparity in votes directly correlating to a large disparity in the quality of the thumbnails. I most certainly respect peoples' aesthetic preference, but not their laziness, nor their continual twisting of my words.
"There you go again." You can say something all you want, but that won't make it true. I clearly stated that this is humor, and it always was, is, and shall remain so regardless of anyone's different sense of humor or lack thereof. This was intended to make fun of forum trolls who act like you are accusing me of acting, while making a point that people vote without putting in any effort to see what they are voting on.
