CactiGuide.com

stefan m. wrote:im sure its not an engelmanii variant

I believe this is called "irony".

stefan m. wrote:If i was asking amateurs, i wouldnt be here. Im annoyed by the fact that everytime you try and ID something, that sounds like youre 100% certain,without a hint of doubt. Its like youre saying is only that one choice is available , no substitutes or mistakes are possible.
I like your tenacity , but really disapprove of your confidence.
Im pretty sure i got banned on purpose though, exam week and everything.

This comes from the guy who often emphasizes "back in the day when I was a rookie grower". To me, it seems like a textbook O. engelmannii, which I've observed plenty in cultivation and the wild. That is not to say I will not accept a reasonable alternative ID, but O. azurea is simply not one. I'm perfectly fine with being corrected. I'm guessing that you're annoyed because I explained why the Gymnocalycium in the other thread is not G. horstii which you posited as a possibility.

I think you need to revisit how to approach IDs. A large portion of descriptions and photos on the internet are misidentified, and many general purpose cactus websites have descriptions that do not reflect morphological variability or current taxonomy. You seem to take info on these websites as gospel and are convinced a priori that you know better than the people you're asking for help. Maybe it is a good idea to reflect on why people call you out as rude and condescending here. Like any hobby, growing succulents is an activity that is predicated on the ability to communicate respectfully with peers. Right now you're only burning bridges.

What about O. aureispina.