>>8805
No, see, you're missing the point here. No one is suggesting you can't criticise. We're just saying you sound like a fool when you do.

"Substandard" hah, that's rich, where is the "standard" for this stuff even set may I ask? You have some vast body of work of a similar quality and subject matter you can point to as setting a standard? No?

Then prepare to look like a babbling fool and to be told as much, sir.