That is surprising. If you exude the same attitude in person as you do in this forum, it is difficult to understand why people aren't falling over themselves to give you a chance to insult their personal telescope choice.
Actually, I don't insult people's scopes here or in person, but I do stay realistic about what one can expect to see. Unfortunately, if one doesn't quietly accept wild claims about how a small refractor provides better images and detail than a decent scope with twice its aperture, and challenges the same, then it is viewed as an insult here. Oh well, so be it.
Even when I had a premium refractor next to me (back in the days when I only had an 8" SCT) I never was offered a look. The owner was mostly busy with imaging so I didn't bother him, although I was curious. I have seen this play out in different ways at several major star parties. There are the imagers, and there are the visual observers. I respect the imagers' investment in time and resources and assume that they might have limited dark sky time. So I don't go asking for views through their gear.
When I was just using an 8" SCT, I would end up swapping views and targets with medium and large Dob, Newt, and SCT owners nearby and we had a good time...while the imager did his thing with the frac. The same dynamic plays out whether I am using a large or small scope...even when that small scope is a 110mm refractor. And it was the views that I had through large Dobs that prompted me to move that way long ago.
There is nothing wrong with preferring the view, ergonomics, etc. of one type over another. In similar apertures a good refractor has a substantial edge over other types in my opinion and aesthetically it is hard to beat. But one should also accept that there are limitations as one begins comparing to larger apertures.