You have got to be one of the most desperate, pandering people I've seen on Reddit thus far. I can't even believe you thought anything you wrote even resembled an argument.
No matter how much bullshit you type it's always going to boil down to the very simple interaction that set this whole thing off.
1.) You make claim Phil Fish doesn't like non-artists (even stating people who do "art in general" your words, not mine, saying outright you don't mean professionals, masters and so forth).
2.) I responded by mocking your statement. Saying do I need an art degree to stop triggering him?
3.) You shifted the focus of the entire discussion to my introduction of the words "art degree". Saying that what does it have to do with making anything?
4.) Well it's not about it being associated with making anything, rather, that it's associated with people who do "art in general". Again your choice of words not mine.
5.) The reality is is that the art degree statement means nothing and has no bearing on the actuality of the discussion. The reason you're desperately focusing on it and not addressing my criticism is because you have no grounds to argue on. What's left is what we see in your posts, rambling, aimless and without substance.
6.) My central point is clear and has been clear the entire time. You have not provided a single point and have no basis to argue on. I've been trying to figure out why you keep coming back and I think it's simply your pride. That said I will state again for the millionth time my central point: You do not have to be an artist to critique art. So giving legs and strength to Phil's point of being upset that "non-artists" shouldn't talk about his games is bullshit. It's why I mocked you.
The problem is is you don't have your head out of your ass, you really can't see the basic principal behind the statement because it requires you to admit you said something stupid (or rather supported something stupid).
Please if you want to continue a discussion provide a talking point that has relevance and actually states why people aren't allowed to critique artistry without using really insulting language like talking in all caps and misspelling on purpose, etc. Neither of those things contain an argument. They just demonstrate, again, you have no idea what you're talking.