Not a judge anymore but when I was a disgusting monster known as a jooj, if I felt if the track had potential, I'd add the resub tag. Its for those mixes that have potential to be mixposts but in their current form don't quite make the cut. Its not like Conditional where we're talking like 1 small update required, it might need a bit of fixing, but not enough where it would need a complete overhaul to be posted. The idea is that if you send a resub track to a judge, they will fast track it on the queue for you.
However if something is really quite far from the standards and would require big updates to be postable we'd just slap it with a big phat nope.
Would be nice indeed! Now that a few tracks of mine passed the panel, and having thoroughly read the evals, I think I have a decent sense of how the individual judges do their thing, and also what things they will typically point out. I could list my findings here, but it would be better to hear it from the folks themselves
Oh, and compliments on the excellent clickbait title
@Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop:
It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track?
Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have?
Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?
Not an eval. I'll leave that to @Gario or @Wiesty. Just posting to drop you a suggestion: use reference tracks. Well mixed tracks in a similar style, from ocr or elsewhere. Figure out if yours is similar enough in frequency balance, loudness, proximity/distance, stereo balance, and everything else that matters.
Also, it still sounds rather 80s. That's not a bad thing.