LONDON | The Cloud

[M II A II R II K]

Official Sources: http://raisethecloud.org/


Building Name: The Cloud


City: London


Country: United Kingdom


Heights--

120 M

Current Building Status: Proposed

[M II A II R II K]

[vid]

OK, I know losing total control over a third of the planet hurts, but THIS IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO EXPRESS THAT ANGUISH.

[KevinFromTexas]

Yikes. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't ride my bike on that.

[Dylan Leblanc]

WTF is going on here?!?!?!

[M.K.]

Yeah, i remember when those people complained about when i finally included the water fountaine for Alpha in Jeddah, the last drop in water, i lost my editor position. Now they are including everything, bubbles, artificial mountains... even an updated version for the still in database Water Jet in Geneve in Switzerland? Is this the democracy balance? so keep going.... Seems really a Joke how things are going on...

Ok, if those are in 'skyscraper' category, then mine excavations are as 'negative skyscrapers' as well, like Gold mine Serra Pelada and the ones in Africa. If Skyscraper means altitude, then the water Jet of Jeddah before and the one still in database Jet D'eau (recently updated), the other in US are valid as well, like the monument Fresh Kills Landfill . If this is in database, why not the rest??? I really do not understand people laughing from me before when they now are stepping in the same own tail. Should i laugh now? My turn? So the Abu Simbel artificial mountain is valid as well, Babel tower of earth, The Dune in Latvia are in database and are artificial mountains.... This discussion was once started from Tim, never a conclusion from owner the site. I really do not care about them in database, i was always flexible in that, but my point is: Why for some members can be included and others not? A general consense for everyone should be and maybe everyone respecting this consense of course.

[M II A II R II K]

The funny thing was you wanting to include water shooting up as part of the actual height of the fountain.

As to whether to add these structures to the database to begin with is another story, and plus these mountains and bubbles aren't being added as you can see.

[M.K.]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

The funny thing was you wanting to include water shooting up as part of the actual height of the fountain.

As to whether to add these structures to the database to begin with is another story, and plus these mountains and bubbles aren't being added as you can see.

As funny as the others did for Jet D'eau and Fountaine Hills in US of 171m, recently approved by SC/AC again. But i understand really what is the reason..., never mind the database is just for the 'chosen ones'.
You can see who included those cause you are the adm:
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=3041
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=4429
For those seems the same 'funny' thing then... Can you explain the structural height part of those?

[M II A II R II K]

Looks like you have a point there, don't know what was thought when that was approved.