/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>2158065
you were the one who brought the whole race shit up. i even said to not bother me with this garbage.

the reason why arguments here never work is because people like you don't understand your own position. you think if you keep complaining and writing then eventually you'll get your way, but that's not how arguments work.

i said it looks ugly. i added my reasons as well, the main reason being the cheekbones being low (see >>2157963). and now look at this garbage you are throwing against me.
>b-but other issues are more important!
irrelevant. they might be but that doesn't change the weight of this issue
>it's just your taste!
it's not just my taste. i mentioned the anatomical and technical issues in >>2157963. i have reasons for believing this is a bad face.
>unappealing etc
see above
>i-it's not valid because it's style critique
see above.

do you think you will ever change my mind with these stupid points? because that's what you are trying to do. as if i'll suddenly say "hey that looks pretty great!".
even bbc admitted that it isn't the best face s/he ever made. but you are just completely unable to let it go.

>>2158016
very funny squidcunt. you're a waste of life. no wonder you never improve.