It's something that I had been thinking of in particular. Back when there were about 800 walls I went through the entire bunch about 3 times over......by the time I had sifted through I'd got 'em down to about 700. [a quite long, time consuming task on a 56k modem] Prior to that there had been no 'conscious' handling of the submissions to any real extent.
That was about a year ago. Since then the site [and its popularity] has grown, hence the larger wall count at present.
The problem seems to me to be how to 'reject' now something that had already 'made it through', except perhaps to compare dl-counts over time.....500 dl's in a week would clearly be better than only managing 500 dl's in a year, ergo the latter was 'less' of a successful wall.
If you filter your browsing through the walls by 'rating' and/or 'dl-count' [popularity], either way you get quite a high standard of works.
At the other end of the scale, save for a few glitches/anomalies, by and large, the walls are significantly less enticing....
But does 2140-odd walls signify 'culling time'?
Is it warranted?
