I was paraphrasing. I believe it was a fair enough summary of your point. To make sure we're on the same page, I'm mostly looking at this part:

Let me see, according to you, designers that are "great to work with" (the ones that just shut-up and do whatever you tell them) produce "eye pollution". The ones that are "difficult" (have opinions and give input whether you want to hear it or not) end up producing "incredible work", but you just hate working with them.

Deliberately or otherwise, that is needlessly condescending and aggressive. What's more, you pulled your parenthetical statements out of the air - the OP never explained what made certain designers difficult to work with. You simple assumed that the worst plausible interpretation was the correct one.

All I did was quote from his own post, and point out how it came across. Apparently a lot of other people agreed.

I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but from my perspective the argument I was just pointing out how he comes across; I didn't actually say he was like that is entirely unsatisfying. (Whether other people agree with either of us or not is, I feel, immaterial to my point here).

For instance, I could suggest that your original post gives me the impression that you are a not-entirely-pleasant person who is looking for opportunities to be miserable - it would be rather unfair of me to then immediately backtrack by saying "I didn't say you were like that, I just said it gave me the impression you were like that."

The possibility that the OP was legitimately frustrated by working repeatedly with designers who actually did suck was apparently not entertained by you - instead, you leapt from his expressed frustration to the hypothesis[1] that he is, more-or-less, an asshole. Behaviour of that sort reduces the value of the discussions that go on here, imho.

[1] If I were in a less charitable mood, I would say "conclusion".