Liontamer's post (http://ocremix.org/f...8754#post758754) definitely addresses everything discussed in this thread so far.
---original for posterity's sake---
This was posted in the review thread for the latest album release, "Pokémon: The Missingno Tracks". Since I wanted to discuss this further, but not in relation to that specific album, here we are.
I really like OverClocked ReMix, but there have been problems with some of their big releases. You would think that with all the time they have to prepare these projects that it wouldn't be an issue, but in some of their latest releases some tracks aren't in .flac, some .flac files don't decompress correctly, and in this case an incorrect version of the remix was used in the final release.
From what I've seen in the project threads the person in charge asks for .wav files from the people working on remixes (at least for the final submission), so why do only some tracks come in .flac and others don't? I understand lossy for the day-to-day remixes, but you would think for the big releases they would have everything in .flac and not just some.
I'm not trying to complain, it's free and the remixes are usually very good. It's just a shame that in the final stages leading up to release is when they seem to drop the ball.
This is troubling to me.
Is there some set of guidelines for accepting an album to be posted on the site, similar to how individual mixes are judged? I mean, why include a FLAC folder if any of the tracks are going to be missing from it? Is including FLAC formats just a gesture of goodwill to the listeners, an "extra", and it's up to the downloader to figure out all the inconsistencies in the torrent and files?
In the video game industry, it seems to have become a standard practice to release a game with glaring problems and bugs, sometimes even crippling issues, just to make some release date. I don't think the same should be allowed here, especially considering how much thought and deliberation goes into allowing individual songs to be admitted.
I know, in respect to quality, albums are not judged like single mixes. However, would it be unacceptable to require a certain degree of quality in how it is released?
I propose that some more stringent guidelines should be implemented for the torrents on ocremix.org's album section. Like how the albums are perfectly fine with tracks that may not individually meet OCR judge's standards, allow the project websites to deal with additional formats and links however they wish. But to have missing tracks, unburnable files, corrupted files, old versions, etc. seems just sloppy. And users who don't browse the forums may never learn of corrections.
At the very least, if you can't preserve the whole of a project into another format, don't bother including it in the torrent. Anyone wondering if it is available in FLAC can go check the project website and find that, yes, some tracks are. Then it won't seem like the actual release was incomplete. As things stand now, I am going to start ignoring the torrents altogether, just like when the album art wasn't included. If I have to pick and choose and listen and research each song to figure out what is going on, I really don't save much time downloading the torrent.