There's nothing moral about the Sixiang's enjoyment of a site. Where does morality come into play?
As for the lack of something to contrast it against, that's inaccurate. We have plenty to contrast her statement of enjoyment too. She's likely to feel uncomfortable around Zeqing's home because:
implies that she is uncomfortable around individuals who desire to eat her. And that would probably extend to the home of that spirit.
And we can infer from her experience at the Silent Stones site that she would be uncomfortable revisiting a place where she had no power to help us and failed to notice the trap in the first place.
So we clearly have things to contrast with. It may not be that every site will be pleasant for her, and to ignore that aspect is to simply ignore a part of the argument.
Why do you assume that a potent qi locus is de facto to be pleasant around? What evidence do you have of that? A potent qi source of opposite nature might actually be uncomfortable to be around. So it seems like you are making assumptions about Qi focuses and then using that assumption to say why a statement regarding the pleasantness of a qi source is useless. We have evidence that this source is pleasant, and we can make inferences that the two other sites might be unpleasant to be around.
As for discussing elemental suitability, that's a discussion on the suitability of the site... which is pointless because all of the sites are suitable or they wouldn't be in the vote. There's no contrast here. They are all suitable. We can debate and argue the possible ramifications on Sixiang and the changes that might occur because of the chosen site, but that's a discussion not about element suitability but about the effects of each choice. Which is a fine discussion, but is so unsubstantiated that there is no way to determine with any degree of certainty what the effects might be.
So no, I'm sticking to my guns. Your argument is inane. It assumes things that have not been established in the story and uses that assumption to unilaterally declare that certain extrinsic evidence is meaningless. Then uses that declaration to argue against certain positions.
Potent environmental qi tends to be described by Ling Qi in positive terms, even when not something she has particular affinity for. Active antipathy would obviously, by definition, be unpleasant, so I saw no reason to divert from my point discussing it. Qi's nice. It's good stuff. Default assumption should be more qi is better unless it isn't. This is a tautology, yes, but I'm not trying to us it to argue for any position.
The only position I'm arguing against is that the quote from Sixiang is relevant. The Argent Vent is nice. Cool. That seemed obviously true to me anyway.
As for your quote, I think it highlights the barrier in communication we're having. Zeqing's a discomfiting presence, our past with the location the Silent Stones are located in is a bit unpeasant, but neither of those have anything to do directly with the nature of the
qi in those locations, which is what Sixiang's asked after, and what I am objecting to characterizing via the quote regarding the Argent Vent. This is why I said Sixiang wasn't making a "moral" judgement; her comment was on the qi itself, not its
context which is what you're bringing up to compare. This is a bad point of comparison, in my opinion.
Like, if I were to argue against Zeqing's home, I would argue against it on the grounds that her home appears likely from our limited knowledge to be an environment similar to whatever it is Sixiang is attempting to construct in our head, and that interference or something might be more likely on those grounds. Or that it would be a rude intrusion to finalize an unassociated spirit's sorta-Domain inside of another's. Or something. But I'm not trying to argue for or against any of the three options here.
Emphatically, I'm only arguing against the weight people appear to be assigning to Sixiang's comment on the Argent Vent, in a time when it was the only site we had access to and we'd barely cultivated for a week. The idea that it'd be considered relevant enough to decide someone's vote is baffling to me.
