You're well on the record on your opinion on clusters, Carnivac

If you want to have a conversation about it you should be willing to do the work to understand the opposite point of view. If not, that's fine, your opinion counts because you're a wonderful artist, but you've stated it enough times. I don't expect all pixel artists around the world to care or agree with me in my theories on pixel art, but if some feel their art has been bettered by it - like st0ven - that makes me as happy as a munchkin cat with a piece of short string.
St0ven: thank you. I do not think heavily AA'ed pieces of pixel art are intrinsically worse. It's very much to do with the cultural climate. If you're making a game that wants to look like a 16bit golden era snes rpg, I would expect lush rendering and AA over sharpness and clean pixels and so would that game's audience. Pixel art will more than partly survive as a method because of nostalgia and fond memories so it pays to know how to emulate the past.
But there also might be the case that learning good cluster theory helps *any* sort of digital artist control their art, so it's a valuable theory to look at. I'm certain people in the future will integrate the pixel-specific thoughts I've had over the years (as expressed in the ramblethread) back into the larger theoretical framework for how to do art fast, precisely and beautifully. Cluster theory isn't very different from some grandmaster painter's approach 300 years ago, I'm willing to bet (even though what the master painted and what I pixelled are nowhere in the same league). We'll see the correlations eventually.