A TYPICAL CRUISE SHIP HAS A POPULATION DENSITY ABOUT 10X THAT PROPOSED FOR OASIS-CITIES 

8,000 person capacity, but in a much smaller space than that proposed for an O.A-city.

Would Oasis-Cities be dystopian over-crowded “human hives”, as naysayers would want to paint them? 

If O.A-cities would be dystopian human hives then how would one describe the ever-growing fleet of enormous cruise ships, any one of which has an effective population-density about 10x greater?  And why would so many people happily pay large sums of money to holiday on one?  A naysayer might respond – “cruise-ships are OK for short holidays, but I wouldn’t want to live in a small crowded space”.

A standard-size O.A-city residence (suitable for a couple with a small child) might be 50m2 which is quite small (although maybe generous by central London standards) but would still be several times larger than a standard cruise-ship cabin – oops, sorry, “state-room”.  Imo, cleverly-designed small spaces are rather appealing – more so if, rather than peering out at an empty sea, your balcony offered a panoramic view of lush gardens, lakes, woodland, and the sound of birdlife.  O.A-cities will be MORE LIVEABLE and unquestionably more useful than frivolous floating holiday vessels.  I also anticipate O.A-city rents (eventually) to be substantially less than O.B-city rents.  (Maybe not at first though)    

My point is this – if we can build 3D “floating cities” for 8000 people, why are we not building 3D cities for 8000 people on land?