Plans for Expanding Workshop & Offering "Instant Upload/Feedback" Functionality to OC ReMix

[djpretzel]

We just need a second big site in the style of VGMix...it'd be so healthy for the remix scene!

If anything, in case djp found himself with a lot of spare time, he could tackle a site design in that vein and find reliable people to maintain it.

Further developing OCR is probably a full time hobby in itself though. But he could do some networking for such a project on the side, and with any luck find some talent to take most of the workload off him.

So, not talking a full blown sister side, but some organisational nudging and oversight to get the right people out of the woodwork. Giving such a site the OCR brand wouldn't be advisable anyway, it needs its own identity.

probably not saying anything new here...i expect that djp was very interested in the revival of VGMix.

Pursuing the netlabel route and all is a logical step.

I just wanna note that devoting some energy to this idea would be the biggest service to the VG remixing scene possible, imo.

Even if it's just on the back burner, if you keep an eye open, things might fall into place in a year or two...

Also twigy, i think you play too much starcraft, or LoL, or something with metal themed tiers anyway

Disagree; I've always felt this was something that we CAN and SHOULD achieve HERE, and that's the plan for this year and next. Essentially, we're going to replace the existing workshop forum with "Workshop on Steroids" - where instead of just posting a thread, you'll be able to associate the mix with a game, songs, integrate into the main OCR database a bit more, embed a soundcloud or youtube, and optionally enable ratings and reviews and likes.

It should be rather awesome, and rather popular, and the key is that it will be integrated on game, system, composer, etc. pages. "Featured" mixes will still be promoted more prominently - that's a given - but "Workshop" mixes will really become first-class citizens in most ways that are meaningful.

This is a niche art form, and I believe centralization makes more sense than bifurcation.

What do you think? I'd love to use this thread to discuss these plans.

[Argle]

This is a niche art form, and I believe centralization makes more sense than bifurcation.

What do you think? I'd love to use this thread to discuss these plans.

To be honest those sound like the words of a power-mad monopolist. I think an open alternative like the old VGMix, not the shadow it's become, would be a good thing. It's not like I would pick one or the other, I'd post on both sites.

[Nase]

I think that while ocr and vgm had a fair amount of people overlap, the community and atmosphere of either was still distinct; that helps with drawing in more people. It's hard to explain why...it might have a bit to do with self-identification by brand.

People get their fuzzy warm feelings in different places.

It's all about finding the perfect balance between centralization (practicality, critical mass) and bifurcation (variety, personality).

In the case of vg remixes, i feel there's room for two distinct big sites with slightly different philisophies, and overall feel. It's just a feeling however, based on gut and memories of vgmix.

I love hearing about your plans though. It could be quite successful if done right...if the presentation/way of access goes beyond a subforum feel, if the feedback and database systems are compelling and accessible, and if the word gets out (newgrounds for example is a good cue)

Edited March 19, 2014 by Nase
fuzzy farm feelings lol..addicted to alliterations!

[Chimpazilla]

I feel like this could work, consolidated on OCR, as long as the database for Workshop ReMixes was kept separate enough from the Official ReMixes, and labeled clearly. Also, I suggest adding another labeling category for workshop threads: in addition to "wip," "mod review" and "finished," add one more thread classification to indicate a mix the person feels is ready to be in this database. I'll try to think of a new term that works.

How would adding the track to the database work? Would the mods maintain the database, and add the tracks to it themselves? Where would this database reside? Or, will this just be a separate forum for threads containing such remixes? Questions, questions.

Also, what kind of QC will there be for these mixes? Will they need to adhere to OCR standards, and who will check this?

Edited March 19, 2014 by Chimpazilla

[Nase]

the idea with vgmix was that the people do QC via a rating system. i don't particularily like rating systems but it's the only way i know of to introduce user governed QC.

if you don't have that you'll just end up with another set of judges and a kind of B-site inside the main site, pretty much like OP suggested.

you could try to come up with a rating system as neutral and minimal as possible. maybe just a favorite option. or a "this needs more/less attention" rating to go with that. i dunno.

genre specific charts of some kind would probably help with ease of access.

[djpretzel]

the idea with vgmix was that the people do QC via a rating system. i don't particularily like rating systems but it's the only way i know of to introduce user governed QC.

if you don't have that you'll just end up with another set of judges and a kind of B-site inside the main site, pretty much like OP suggested.

you could try to come up with a rating system as neutral and minimal as possible. maybe just a favorite option. or a "this needs more/less attention" rating to go with that. i dunno.

genre specific charts of some kind would probably help with ease of access.

All of this can be supported.

We know from experience that there are certain artists who HATE rating systems, so I'd PREFER to provide an option to disable it on a per-mix basis, with the understanding that those mixes might not show up on trending/popular lists as prominently.

It would make zero sense for the workshop to function as a microcosm of the main judges panel. A ratings system indeed makes sense, and like I said, I'd prefer to make it optional. A way of "liking" mixes WITHOUT rating them at all should ALSO be present. A way for artists to upload the mix but also embed a soundcloud or youtube preview would be supported. And of course, comments AND tagging (which handles genres to a certain extent) would be supported.

If you add integration with OCR's game, song, and composer database on TOP of that, well.... I honestly don't get where the need for a completely separate site comes into play. Granted, we don't have ANY of that yet, and right now it's just a forum - which actually works pretty well, all things considered - but this is very much the plan. For this year, unless significant facts change.

As we have done in the past, we will reach out to the community for feedback on building this new workshop, and I've no doubt people will have a ton of great ideas. The challenge will be integrating workshop content alongside featured content in a way that brings additional visibility to the former without compromising the integrity/visibility of the latter.

I think we can do it, and I don't get the pessimism about "oh it needs to be another site". Perhaps people feel like the judging system here is so entrenched that anything that presents a feature-rich alternative will never happen, but I think we can - and SHOULD - try to make both systems work.

Ultimately, it's the 21st century. If people want to release VGM arrangements, they have a multitude of instant-gratification options that make a lot more sense than a dedicated site, unless you ALSO care about community and integration into a larger, VGM-centric context. SoundCloud, BandCamp, YouTube, Tindeck... the list goes on. There needs to be value added. At OCR, the value added has historically been:

1. a curated, judge-evaluated collection of arrangements that conform to a loose set of meaningful standards
   
2. a database of games, albums, songs, composers, etc. that provides additional context
   
3. a badass community & staff
   
4. stability, continuity, and promotion
   

I believe we can KEEP all four of these things INTACT while also adding on an enhanced workshop area that helps meet demand for instant-gratification, quick-feedback, ratings-enabled, community-curated mixes. Any separate site that wants to tackle these goals still needs to worry about #2 AND #3 AND #4. #2 can be solved in a number of ways that involve various technical compromises, but would be largely redundant effort. #3 & #4 are pretty difficult, when it comes down to it, and don't come overnight no matter how amazing a website you build.

To be honest, I'm a little tired of the "it has to be a separate site!!" way of thinking. It feels defeatist to me, a little pessimistic, but most of it all it makes an artificial argument that a site has to be defined by a single means of content approval/workflow. There are already several sites out there, for one. vgremix.com, gameremixes.com, etc. It's been done, it's being done, and I feel like we've seen years of why just standing up a website that offers this functionality isn't enough. On top of that, I feel like OCR has proven and continues to prove that we're capable of amazing things when the community comes together. If we add this type of system to what we've got, it might be a bumpy ride for awhile, but everything I've seen from staff, visitors, and artists suggests we can work our way through it and emerge with something awesome.

My personal observation is this: plenty of folks seem willing to weigh in and say "OMG WE NEED VGMIX BACK" or "IT HAS TO BE ANOTHER SITE" or express unfounded pessimism that we can't make this happen. Ultimately, if you care about the community, you should WANT us to succeed with this idea. I deeply hope that when we begin these efforts in earnest, we'll get constructive feedback and not kneejerk dismissal.

As we get closer to making this real, we will absolutely start a thread detailing our specific plans, point-for-point, and soliciting community feedback. I can at least confirm that ratings, likes, reviews, genre tagging, embedding soundcloud/youtube previews, file upload, AND integration with the overall OCR database are all on the table. If you add all that up, like I said... I'm psyched, because I think it'll be rather awesome. Just need to get it done!

Edited March 19, 2014 by djpretzel

[Nase]

Lol, wasn't aware of how loaded the vgmix topic is for you.

If neat integration of these features into the main site proves successful, i'm all for it.

I was thinking along the lines that if there's a second site, it should not be an ocr franchise thing. IF one decided to make something separate, it would definitely be better to give it its own identity.

If you can work the core features of vgmix into ocr without succumbing to chaos and bloat, then GREAT! Godspeed.

[djpretzel]

Lol, wasn't aware of how loaded the vgmix topic is for you.

If neat integration of these features into the main site proves successful, i'm all for it.

I was thinking along the lines that if there's a second site, it should not be an ocr franchise thing. IF one decided to make something separate, it would definitely be better to give it its own identity.

If you can work the core features of vgmix into ocr without succumbing to chaos and bloat, then GREAT! Godspeed.

Not vgmix specifically - just the idea that another site is REQUIRED and that we can't make this work here.

When the smoke clears and we've got something running & automated, I actually expect it to REDUCE chaos and bloat in the long, long term. In the short-term, like I said, bumpy ride, but we're gonna need more than godspeeds - we're gonna need support, feedback, testing, patience, and optimism.

If you've got a list of specific suggestions, concerns, etc. regarding this entire notion, throw 'em at me here and we'll compile at some point. I'd like to talk this through a bit more with anyone willing.

[Cash]

A ratings system indeed makes sense, and like I said, I'd prefer to make it optional. A way of "liking" mixes WITHOUT rating them at all should ALSO be present. A way for artists to upload the mix but also embed a soundcloud or youtube preview would be supported. And of course, comments AND tagging (which handles genres to a certain extent) would be supported.

I think it's important to make a rating system optional. I would not like having every remix I post in the workshop to be subject to a rating. I often post early works in progress that aren't in ready to be rated, I'd feel less compelled to post incomplete work were it subject to a rating. Maybe that's just me, but I'd wager other people probably feel the same. I'm concerned that remixes from newcomers who have just started remixing would tend to receive lower ratings. I'm also concerned that people would be more likely to skip over remixes that have lower ratings.

If the rating system were to be optional, my concerns probably wouldn't be an issue.

[djpretzel]

I think it's important to make a rating system optional. I would not like having every remix I post in the workshop to be subject to a rating. I often post early works in progress that aren't in ready to be rated, I'd feel less compelled to post incomplete work were it subject to a rating. Maybe that's just me, but I'd wager other people probably feel the same. I'm concerned that remixes from newcomers who have just started remixing would tend to receive lower ratings. I'm also concerned that people would be more likely to skip over remixes that have lower ratings.

If the rating system were to be optional, my concerns probably wouldn't be an issue.

Thanks for weighing in and making your opinion known! I really want this to be optional as well; how would you feel, though, about the implications being that the mix might not show up in some prominent places - for example, a list of trending/popular mixes - if ratings were disabled? Is this an acceptable compromise?

We need to encourage people to leave ratings enabled, because we'll want people to use the rating system as much as they're comfortable with, but at the same time we want to give artists like yourself a choice, for each mix... it's just that the choice might come with tradeoffs.

[Argle]

Seems to me there are 2 separate groups, people who want to post WIPs and get constructive feedback, and people who want to post finished tracks and reach an audience looking for remixes. There should be a system that satisfies both groups.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Argle

[Nase]

I'm concerned that remixes from newcomers who have just started remixing would tend to receive lower ratings. I'm also concerned that people would be more likely to skip over remixes that have lower ratings.

Harsh reality is, that is exactly the point of a ratings system. That IS how quality control would work.

Judging art by numeric values, in a democratic fashion no less, is stupid by design. It's also immensely practical for some purposes.

[Eino Keskitalo]

Some imaginable use cases I can think of that I'd enjoy (brainstorming a bit too):

• click on a favourite remixer's profile, see a list of their public WIPs, go give feedback
  
• click on an obscure game in the database, notice there's a WIP from 2010, go pester the remixer in the comments for an update
  
• automatic source link for WIPs (dreaming.. legally grey area)
  
• see at a glance if the remixer is intending their wip to be submitted to the panel eventually
  
• see at a glance if the remix was already submitted to the panel
  
• upload the wip mp3 to OCR for hosting
  
• submit the finished remix to panel in-site
  
• listen to a previous version of a WIP when giving feedback to compare improvements
  
• soundcloud-style timestamp comments
  

--Eino

[Cash]

Thanks for weighing in and making your opinion known! I really want this to be optional as well; how would you feel, though, about the implications being that the mix might not show up in some prominent places - for example, a list of trending/popular mixes - if ratings were disabled? Is this an acceptable compromise?

Yeah, that sounds reasonable. On remixes that I don't wanted rated, I don't think I'd want them to show up in prominent places either. Sometimes I'll post incomplete remixes to get some ideas and I'm not necessarily looking to get a rating, or reach an audience. So having such a remix excluded from prominent places would actually be preferrable.

We need to encourage people to leave ratings enabled, because we'll want people to use the rating system as much as they're comfortable with, but at the same time we want to give artists like yourself a choice, for each mix... it's just that the choice might come with tradeoffs.

Yep, I understand there will be tradeoffs. Just on the surface, I like to idea of expanding the workshop. I'll be able to give more feedback once the specific plans are laid out. I am excited to see some of this stuff in action down the road.

EDIT:

Harsh reality is, that is exactly the point of a ratings system. That IS how quality control would work.

Judging art by numeric values, in a democratic fashion no less, is stupid by design. It's also immensely practical for some purposes.

Yes, that's true. However, the point of the workshop is to help "newbs" improve their craft. Getting downvoted into oblivion because you're new at remixing doesn't really help meet that goal, especially if people are skipping over your remixes.

Another point, just because a piece of music gets high ratings doesn't mean it's any good. When I used to check out remixes on Newgrounds, I came across plenty of bad ones that had high ratings. Ratings do not necessarily provide quality control.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Cash

[djpretzel]

Seems to me there are 2 separate groups, people who want to post WIPs and get constructive feedback, and people who want to post finished tracks and reach an audience looking for remixes. There should be a system that satisfies both groups.

Well... I strongly agree. Certainly we'd maintain the current capability (via thread titles) of marking something as WIP or Finished, and certainly that would be emphasized wherever workshop mixes are being listed, throughout the site.

Beyond that, and making ratings opt-out on a per-mix basis, did you have any specific concerns about the system I've been describing not being able to make both audiences happy?

Some imaginable use cases I can think of that I'd enjoy (brainstorming a bit too):

• click on a favourite remixer's profile, see a list of their public WIPs, go give feedback YES
  
• click on an obscure game in the database, notice there's a WIP from 2010, go pester the remixer in the comments for an update YES
  
• automatic source link for WIPs (dreaming.. legally grey area) KINDA
  
• see at a glance if the remixer is intending their wip to be submitted to the panel eventually TBD
  
• see at a glance if the remix was already submitted to the panel TBD
  
• upload the wip mp3 to OCR for hosting YES - DETAILS TBD
  
• submit the finished remix to panel in-site TBD
  
• listen to a previous version of a WIP when giving feedback to compare improvements TBD
  
• soundcloud-style timestamp comments KINDA
  

--Eino

Great stuff man; I edited in responses based on current plans.

Regarding automatic source links, well, you'd be able to link and/or embed YouTubes, and there are a lot of YTs out there. This isn't truly "automatic" but it should be easy enough for a submitting artist to quickly find the source tune(s) involved and embed them into the body of their mixpost, for quick reference. I think that's a good way of addressing this use case.

Regarding SoundCloud style timestamp comments - that would be far too much custom development & wheel-reinventing to implement ourselves. And why bother, when SoundCloud's done such a good job? Instead, as with YouTube embeds, we'd allow SoundCloud embeds, which of course support timestamp comments. Hopefully this will have two effects:

1. Get more of the community using & comfortable with SoundCloud, which has a lot of utility and...
   
2. Drive more traffic to ReMixer's SoundCloud pages!
   

All of your points about synergies between the workshop and submission queue need to be sorted out, and we're going to have internal staff decisions about what we think is best and makes the most sense before presenting our plan to the community. I can of course confirm that the judges panel isn't going away, and that mix evaluation will still be a core operating principle of the site. One option under consideration is that everything posted to the workshop that's marked as final will be also considered a submission. We could potentially add an "opt-out" of formal judging/featured status, but that's something we need to decide on internally and weigh the potential impacts. I love your thinking though, as you've touched on a lot of the potential impacts/uses of the planned system.

[Argle]

I think I like the idea of a "like" better than a number rating system, otherwise people will obsess over their score. idk

[jnWake]

I think this would be pretty cool. The Workshop has a lot of potential to become a bigger thing than it is right now, hopefully with more users participating.

[Melbu Frahma]

I feel like this could work, consolidated on OCR, as long as the database for Workshop ReMixes was kept separate enough from the Official ReMixes, and labeled clearly.

I think this is my only concern. On the surface, it sounds like a great idea, so long as you keep the OCR-level stuff separate from the WIP-level stuff. For me, as someone who's more casual about the Workshop (since I don't produce music, but can only offer listener advice) and has a very selective experience with game music, I think integrating the workshop into the database would allow me to contribute more to the art being produced in there. I feel far more qualified (and therefore comfortable) offering constructive criticism on remixes from FF7, or Might and Magic VI, or the first couple Pokemon generations, or Descent, than I ever would on Mega Man, Zelda, or any other game I've never played extensively. This seems like something that would make it easier for me to do that, rather than scrolling through pages of music from games I probably can't really offer much input on.

On the other hand, I think it's vitally important to keep the two databases as clearly defined and separate as possible, because if they start to run into each other, some of the impetus to strive for track perfection and bettering oneself as an artist gets lost. I'd fear that some people would take the attitude of "I got lots of likes in the Workshop and it's in OCR's database somewhere, that's close enough for me."

[Brandon Strader]

Under the cloak of night, Brando slinks unnoticed, in a ninja-like manner, to share an opine upon the thread:

I feel like this would betray both the workshop and OCR's long-standing rule of not adding a rating system for posted remixes. Granted, these would not be "posted remixes" as far as being on the front page of the site, but rating would be just as damaging to them as it would to a front page mix.

How about instead of ratings, make it a thumbs up or thumbs down system that only a workshop moderator can add to a workshop mix? This would denote whether they think the mix is ready for prime time or not. Changing the system in the way described would make workshop moderators obsolete when it is their opinions that matter in the workshop. Excuse my french but I don't give a darn what XxssjGoku69xX thinks of my mix, whether he rates it a 2 or a 10. If I'm posting a mix in the workshop, I'm posting it there to get help, and feedback from someone who is at least on par with myself musically such as a workshop mod. I've personally seen horrible advice going out over the workshop and it's really discouraging, and I feel that is a more important thing to address than adding ratings which would more or less be akin to making the situation worse. I don't think OCR has to have VGMIX functionality, OCR was always better than VGMIX, and it was better for a reason.

Besides, I think OCR should support vgmix right now, not go into competition with it. Beyond how much that would hurt OCR's systems, it wouldn't be particularly kind to vgmix.

If this is something you really need to add then I will support that, and might even use it, depending on how it works out. But like I said, if all I get are reviews and ratings from XxssjGoku69xX then I'd be less likely to ever use the workshop. IMO the more important functionality change would be to emphasize workshop moderators and their input on that forum. Have their responses highlighted or something. Maybe change responses from people who aren't posted remixers to be greyed out and only visible if you click it. In the interest of receiving quality information rather than quantity information.

Lastly I would not want works in progress on my artist profile. I do not currently have a lot of threads in the workshop because I am against releasing incomplete material. This new system sounds like it'd be a way to highlight unfinished works and I'm not cool with that as an artist.

@Cash I think it'd be a good move to make it so only mixes labeled as "finished" could be rated, not WIPs or anything else. That was a good point.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Brandon Strader

[timaeus222]

@Cash I think it'd be a good move to make it so only mixes labeled as "finished" could be rated, not WIPs or anything else. That was a good point.

I'm going to second this for obvious reasons.

I feel like this could work, consolidated on OCR, as long as the database for Workshop ReMixes was kept separate enough from the Official ReMixes, and labeled clearly.

and this. I wouldn't want people to say "Oh yeah! I got posted on OCR! I'm official now!" if they've literally just posted something in the Workshop forums and it actually wasn't judged/dped or approved at all. Getting a mixpost is an honor, and you know, just posting something that wasn't evaluated isn't really an honor. You'd just liked what you'd done and had wanted to share it, but that'd be about it.

I think it's important to make a rating system optional. I would not like having every remix I post in the workshop to be subject to a rating. I often post early works in progress that aren't in ready to be rated, I'd feel less compelled to post incomplete work were it subject to a rating. Maybe that's just me, but I'd wager other people probably feel the same. I'm concerned that remixes from newcomers who have just started remixing would tend to receive lower ratings. I'm also concerned that people would be more likely to skip over remixes that have lower ratings.

If the rating system were to be optional, my concerns probably wouldn't be an issue.

and this. Except I would agree with Argle that "Likes" would be more friendly than star ratings. I'd add that perhaps we could just have Likes, but no Dislikes. Then it'd be just the number of Likes you have, rather than the ratio of Likes/Dislikes you have. It would at least make me feel better if I were a beginner than in a star rating system or something like that.

Edited March 20, 2014 by timaeus222

[Nase]

Except I would agree with Argle that "Likes" would be more friendly than star ratings. I'd add that perhaps we could just have Likes, but no Dislikes. Then it'd be just the number of Likes you have, rather than the ratio of Likes/Dislikes you have. It would at least make me feel better if I were a beginner than in a star rating system or something like that.

Emotionally, I'm leaning towards that as well (as i said, ratings can be useful but are evil)....but the disadvantages of having just a purely "Likes" based system have to be considered:

It'd be way more prone to hype of individual mixes (and individual games). Once a mix reaches a critical amount of likes it'll just keep on generating more exponentially cause of improved exposure. So popularity gaps are increased.

Having a separate, more informative measure for voicing (dis)approval lends itself better to people discovering hidden gems that only have few likes, reviews and ratings, though very enthusiastic ones.

I believe the best possible system requires the inclusion of this controversial feature, the challenge is making it neutral enough, minimizing the negative impact on the community. Compromises are in order.

Another thought: i think it might be best if the (still optional) ratings were coupled with a mandatory review. Nothing too detailed necessarily, but with a moderately low word minimum.

Just to pull back on the newgrounds "blam this piece of crap!" factor, yknow.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Nase

[HoboKa]

More exposure? Check

Giving copywrite trolls an even bigger middle-finger? Check

Throwback to VGMix? Sort of check???

I love it!!

...still kinda hope that VGMix5 comes through

[Bundeslang]

Sounds like a promising idea, I will definitely keep an eye on this.

[Eino Keskitalo]

Great stuff man; I edited in responses based on current plans.

Cool, sounding pretty good! I was actually thinking some of those would be direct "nah". Promising.

Regarding automatic source links, well, you'd be able to link and/or embed YouTubes, and there are a lot of YTs out there. This isn't truly "automatic" but it should be easy enough for a submitting artist to quickly find the source tune(s) involved and embed them into the body of their mixpost, for quick reference. I think that's a good way of addressing this use case.

I already link youtube videos to the wip posts. Can the system keep track if other people have posted the same source and offer that? Or will OCR end up in court for that?

Being able to enter the source link in some separate manner than in the message might be good. It'll highlight to posters that it is good to include the source, at least. And people who give feedback might find the link to the source in a standardized place.

Regarding SoundCloud style timestamp comments - that would be far too much custom development & wheel-reinventing to implement ourselves. And why bother, when SoundCloud's done such a good job? Instead, as with YouTube embeds, we'd allow SoundCloud embeds, which of course support timestamp comments.

What I would want is that if I make a post with feedback on a WIP, the artist can see my comments in a single place. If the Soundcloud thing can be embedded into the feedback including the comments, then it'd fulfill this.

All of your points about synergies between the workshop and submission queue need to be sorted out, and we're going to have internal staff decisions about what we think is best and makes the most sense before presenting our plan to the community. I can of course confirm that the judges panel isn't going away, and that mix evaluation will still be a core operating principle of the site.

One additional thing that came to mind regarding this synergy is making changes to a submitted mix. I do this since I am still poor at determining if a piece is good/finished/etc.

It'd be cool if I could make changes to a submitted track that isn't in panel yet, at the cost of bumping the track back to the end of the queue, which I would find reasonable. The thing is if I try to send in an update in an "unofficial" manner (sorry Larry) I worry which version will end up in the panel/etc. I suppose the same goes for approved pieces too - the system would support an update and there would be some appropriate evaluation process (I would find complete re-evaluation reasonable actually - serves me right but the staff would know what would be reasonable for them).

One option under consideration is that everything posted to the workshop that's marked as final will be also considered a submission. We could potentially add an "opt-out" of formal judging/featured status, but that's something we need to decide on internally and weigh the potential impacts.

Okay, final->submit satisfies in-site submitting and the opt-out satisfies seeing if the artist is aiming for an OCR submission. The latter would be useful when you give feedback, since if they do aim for OCR, one can try to give feedback that would help them fulfill the submission standards. If they don't, you can keep the feedback more general. I quite often wonder about this when I give feedback. To fulfill that role though, the opt-out should be considered when the thread is created (of course the artist is free to change their mind about that any time).

I do think marking the piece as finished should be clearly separate from submitting, the latter should be a process clearly in itself so that the user knows it's important (this might be obvious but it's not clear from the above). So the opt-out above shouldn't control if the mix ends up in the panel queue, it should just be informational.

Right now workshop has three categories for ReMixes: Work-in-progress, Finished, Mod Review. I could imagine using: Work-in-progress, Release candidate, Mod review, Finished, Submit(ted).

The way I've used the current categories "Finished" means a release candidate where I think it's finished, but am taking in more feedback (and usually end up changing the piece quite a bit). "Release candidate" is of course a software term, not a musical term.. could be better. It might be useful to differentiate "finished" from "release candidate", the latter meaning almost/possibly finished, but the artist is still willing to incorporate feedback, useful for both those who give and want feedback.

What else.. Brandon is different from me about wanting to show/highlight unfinished stuff, but it sounds that you'd need to be able to opt-out/in of featuring your WIPs in the database, per-mix basis probably.

--Eino

[Mirby]

The thing is if I try to send in an update in an "unofficial" manner (sorry Larry) I worry which version will end up in the panel/etc.

Yeah there was an issue with this regarding a Cid track. Granted the update was NO'd as well, but I just wanted to mention that sending updates to subbed songs can be tricky in regards to which version is judged.