Idea for system revision

[Brandon Strader]

Suggestions are like buttholes, everyone has one and they all stink. Here is mine.

As you can see from the drawing, the user will log in on their verified remixing account. The account will be verified in any number of possible ways. The most basic way is they can apply for remixer status. If someone "abuses" the system in any way, they will lose their remixer status, and will not be able to upload to the site.

After the verified remixer submits their MP3, it goes through a brief uploading phase during which the song transfers from their computer to an online server. The song will only exist in this area until it has been judged, which, for this new system, should not take more than a day or two per song. Keep in mind that the judges will still consider the song the same way they did before, yet the focus will be more on the votes -- yes or no, which will add up to a total of 10 votes before the voting is completed.

Judges can post feedback during the judging period, and AFTER the judging period, allowing the artist to receive feedback even after they succeed or fail. If a song fails, the MP3 will be removed but the page will be archived and will be searchable and able to be posted to in the future. Similar to the current archive of judges decision threads that lead back to the early year 2000s.

A good addition to the user's submission page is the ability for regular users -- verified remixers or not -- to add comments and feedback of their own. In addition to the judge's feedback, this additional user feedback will be a great asset for artists.

Tabs like "Description" that appear under the user's title and mp3 preview will be expandable if you click on it. Within the tab will be the user's submitted description that they typed along with their submission.

Here are a few of the assets of using this new system:

--Much faster response for artists who submit their work

--Cuts out the bloat

--Split decisions will no longer hang the judges -- their feedback will be in addition to their vote. They should simply vote and write feedback to the best of their abilities without considering the thoughts of other judges unless it's specifically necessary. The point of the judges will be to accurately critique the flaws or assets to a track without being influenced by other judges.

--Songs like Rhymes with Elixir would need a majority of yes votes to pass out of 10 possible votes. Feedback wouldn't be necessary similar to the currently existing Rhymes with Elixir judgement thread.

--The queue would still exist, but it would in a TANGIBLE FORM. Instead of titles listed from 2008 that nobody even knows if they exist anymore, there would be a page you could visit with the mp3 and its voting progress. Needless to say the new system would take less than a few days, there would be no mixes from 2008 just sitting there.

If a song is going to pass then the judges know the moment they hear it. They know at this point if a hi-hat is too loud, but if that isn't worth failing a song over. They know when to request a resub, and they know when a song won't pass. This is an attempt to speed up the process based on obvious experience. It seems like most of the delay in the judging process stems from an assembly line with gears that don't turn simultaneously. One gear might turn, then stop, and a week later a gear further down the line will turn. With this new system, all gears should be turning simultaneously and the system should flow smoothly.

Thank you for hearing my proposal.

[Liontamer]

Just want to mention, we're already underway with working to automate the submissions process, though it's a lower priority than other stuff we're working on.

We will not embrace a system with votes, yet no required feedback for evaluating subs. There's much less benefit to having judge feedback come after voting. Generally, when we vote on a track, we're done with it; we have a lot more material to go through, so we don't bother revisiting the old. We also DON'T encourage voting a vacuum, which is why we can read and challenge other judges votes.

We don't have to write books on our votes, but encouraging voting without explanations or being able to see what others said is foolish because it lacks accountability and encourages kneejerk reactions. Having to write out your reasons and the ability to challenge others to justify their reasoning benefits the process.

Also, the # of votes needed wouldn't change. We don't require every judge to vote on everything, that would slow the process.

We don't want user feedback intertwined with submissions evaluations. Users are not involved in that process. Users decide what they like based solely on what they hear, and they have different agendas than judges or even people attempting to give WIP feedback (who ALSO differ from the judges). All that needs to stay separate.

I'd like to see the ability to stream audio from whatever outside URL you provide, to encourage more feedback in the WIP forums.

Beyond automating the posting of submissions to the panel and embedded streaming of MP3 files, I think we're fine.

[Brandon Strader]

Automation is nice, I am happy to hear you guys are working on it, though I do think having remixer verified accounts would be very helpful as far as automation is concerned. I mean you could automate it to somehow post the submissions from the email but email is susceptible to so many "spams" that would be eliminated by remixer flags in our accounts that allow us to upload.. I am very happy you read through all that despite not finding too many useful ideas, but thank you.

[Palpable]

I'll also add that the explanation of the vote doesn't usually add a lot of time, but obviously helps the remixer or other judges. I spend most of the time on a vote trying to reason why I should vote YES or NO; once I've figured out which way I'm voting, I'm just writing down the thought process.