I've been giving and taking art advice for a long time. I would say the main categories of people posting on Pixelation, as differentiated by how they react to critique and edits, are the following:
1. Users that never post any updates to their piece. Sometimes they never post again on Pixelation at all. Other times they may start another thread with new art too, but they do not follow up with updates and progress on their stuff.
2. Users that react to critique by trying to address near-all points given to them in their updated art.
3. Users that filter the critique they get and address what they find they need to and do not discuss why they left this or that piece of advice out.
4. Users that filter the critique they get and address what they find they need to and
discuss what and why they filtered out in great detail.
Here's what I've noticed about how these different categories show in how they develop.
Users of the first type do not progress fast, or I do not know if they progress at all because they never post again. They want to show off. Pixelation sometimes is not for the weak of heart. The benefit is that critique is put in writing so they can revist the critique that hurt their feelings a year from now and see if there's anything to it then. As a personal aside, this type of orphan thread breaks my heart a bit

Users of the second type seem like perfect c&c recievers, and perhaps they're very useful to an art critique community and they do seem to progress very fast... in their one thread. They soak up critique like sponges and their piece becomes better very fast. But they do not systemize, there's no structure in how they incorporate critique. They're 'augmented' by the Pixelation method of shotgun critique, but when they go off the drugs, they revert to a less amped version of themselves. Of course there is a cumulative progression, but appearances can be decieving. It often seems to me these users take the word of others over their own senses. This is useful for beginning artists. At some point however, I do think artistic progression necessarily becomes more esoteric and the artist needs to stop trying to create art that pleases everyone. The end goal is not to make a piece of art nobody would have any critique for.
Users of the third type to me seem to progress slower. Sometimes they're second type users that have moved on into themselves. They take what critique they need and do not discuss too much why they didn't take the critique they didn't. It's just my experience that the type of progress their artwork benefits from from their stay in Pixelation is not very blatant. They fix their AA, they may stop banding, they tighten up. It's that 5%. They don't move by leaps and bounds because they're themselves enough by now. They are secure. They're using Pixelation like a service, to get that last polish pass. As I've noticed these users end up either as fixtures, giving critique to others, or they tighten up their tech and leave, which is totally fine.
Users of the fourth and final type seem self-conscious to me. They have an ego thing sometimes that pushes them to want to tell you why your critique is false. Sometimes they are right and the critique is no good, sometimes not. It's besides the point. It seems to me this attitude leads to people becoming better artists slower and better at structuring argumentation. I'm not going to say Pixelation isn't here for the latter. Art discussion is valid, and nobody here is a teacher of authority to have a final say. I'm just noticing that this is a type of repeated behaviour. The reader might be well-advised to consider if they fall into this category and if they do, to ponder if what they're hoping to achieve in Pixelation is to become better pixel artists as fast as possible or instead to become better orators.
As a user that's been here a long time, if I may give a piece of advice is that you shouldn't fight critique. Filter it as you wish, but don't write me a story about why you won't incorporate a suggestion. There's going to be a lot of critique thrown your way and it's officially a-ok with Pixelation decorum to not address every person and why you won't do every little thing they've told you in long-form text. Users will contradict each others' critique. It's impossible not to. This is a great thing. Leave it up to them to discuss and compare why this is or is not a good idea you're being given. Make up your mind privately and move on with the art, not the argument. You'll become better, faster like this.
If you see people in your thread bring up critique you filtered out again and again, your filter's may not be very brave, though. Adjust accordingly.
Furthermore there is a significant life skill in my advice. When a tutor of any kind is giving you a piece of their mind, they may be well-meaning or they may want to hurt your feelings. Make up your mind privately. Either do what they want you to do, or don't do it. But don't have an argument. Because if you do, you're making it an argument about YOU. It becomes about you talking about what's going on in your mind. In art, at the end, nobody in the audience will be privy to your internal explanations on what you did. They only experience the end result. Don't make the appreciation of that experience contingent on them having a private conversation with the artist. Battling critique is just training artists-to-be to not make self-contained art.