adma
Superstar
Get over yourself. Obviously, I was correct in saying that you have confused heritage/cultural contributions with aesthetics.
Huh?!?
Well, then again, it's noteworthy that the only one of my examples you directly commented on was OCAD. Probably because, in effect, you had nothing to say about UC/OH/StLH/US. It isn't so much that they're deficient or defective in and of themselves; more that they're simply remote, if not altogether severed from, your "entirely subjective" aesthetic universe--y'know, "heritage/cultural contributions" = irrelevant old crocks that speak in a lingo that's remote from your own. That's what makes them "deficient"...to you. And it's as silly to "force them upon you" as it is to force Segovia upon your average Yngwie Malmsteen diehard. I guess. I suppose...
Sorry to deflate your ego just a little bit, but aesthetics are entirely subjective. I should have every right to place Trump in My list of Toronto's all time most aesthetically pleasing buildings without being called ignorant.
And on the same grounds of freedom of speech that you're claiming, I (and anyone else) should have the right to override the last four words in the above statement. Otherwise...why have standards of urban aesthetics and judgment at all?
You have to realize: your taste may be your taste, but there are people here that have more knowledge and perspective than you--enough to shoot some mighty big holes in your, uh, "taste logic".
Ironically, your egotistic post exudes ignorance.
Ignorance of what? I guess in the same way that Santorum/Tea Party types find ivory-tower pointy-heads "ignorant"...
Ah, no wonder people like Urban Shocker have abandoned UT.