As to Prearden’s stunt described in post #65 and I can only conclude that he must have too much time on his hands.
Making bogus posts, pretending linked content is something that it isn’t…I believe I speak for many when I say that is simply not the way we do things here.

There are some good points in this thread, but let me deal first with the non-starters.
Creating 2 showcases. No, would be too complicated
Setting up some type of rating system. No. We are talking about music here, not some kind of competitive sport.

There is an unspoken – and broadly respected – rule that if you really don’t like what you hear, you don’t comment.

This may deprive the poster of some useful criticism but it does preserve his or her confidence.

Is there a mutually supportive clique? Perhaps, but there are some forum members for whom I have a lot of time and yet I have still torn some of their work apart – when I felt that I could justify such criticism.

I find that very few reviewers can be bothered to listen to material in detail and post specific comments.

The overall effect a song has on the listener is, of course, important, but some effort must be made to understand what elements have combined to create that effect.

Let me demonstrate :

“This sucks!” ‘Loved it, way to go!” are equally useless as criticism.

“I particularly like your choice of organ patch, the chord structure of the bridge section and the bass+drum break that occurs at 2:14”


and

“You might like to re-do the part of the chorus where you sing off key, the banjo and violin are fighting for the same space and the melody in the verse does not fit well with the chords”

..are specific, actionable and helpful.

Marc's SoundCloud
Marc's YouTube