Again, we have a rating system because of the battle... One could say that it doesn't make sense to have art compete against eachother, but it can be fun to do. You don't want your songs to be rated? Fine, don't put them in the battle, and ignore any votes you do get, or ask people not to rate the song in the description since "untagging" the voting option is a feat not implemented atm.

Fair enough. I suppose that's more or less what I am doing now, but precisley for people like me, who feel uncomfortable with having their music graded, and who don't participate in battles, the "untagging" option could be handy. Also don't forget, this isn't just about me, but I assume a fair amount of artists - especially young and unexperienced - my be reluctant to join an otherwise excellent community precisely because having others grade their music might be a seriously discomforting thought. Just a suggestion, nothing more .

Some people (like me) like to get their stuff rated. I do consider my music to be "art" but in the end, it is aimed at an audience and I can derive useful information from the avg. percentage I'm receiving, and not in the least, the number of votes. These votes come from people who have listened to the song and gave it some thought... or not, when they vote it down. In which case, I could opt to either ignore the dummy who just doesn't understand or think about why this may have happened and adjust my style to get my point across more effectively next time. True; I prefer elaborate critiques, but the vote system still works for me.

Again, I totally see where you are coming from, but I don't think all musicians write music for the same reason, and hence "ratings" might not be as useful to all equally (in some cases, even discomforting). I personally don't take anything away from pure numbers, as I don't write music to please a majority, but write music which I know will not find many followers. I am Ok with that fact and am happy to know that there is a niche market out there who gets a great deal out of it. In a sense then, as a musician, lower ratings don't tell me anything new. Comments, however, do. When I get a 70% rating that teaches me nothing aside from "yeah, lot's of people won't react to this music, what's new", but comments, on the other hand, can do so much more. For one, comments give you an answer to a far more important question than "do people xyz like my music", namely "WHY do or do not people like this" and "what can be done to improve it?".

Now, I understand that many people actually find it valuable to learn how many people like their music and what overall response they are getting, as this can be very useful in figuring out all sorts of things, such as how marketable is one's music, what songs are people reacting to strongest (ie. making decisions for releasing singles, etc.). But, of course, many don't write music for the purpose of widespread commerical success - ie. myself. What's most valuable to me are specific criticisms, such as "hard to hear the vibraphone", or "too much reverb on vocal", or "lyrics come off too corny", etc. etc.

So all I am saying is that there is of course widespread use for ratings, just that this is not true for all of us (I am assuming I am not entirely alone here), and that some - again, myself included - are positively distracted by rating music with numbers, and, potentially, feel more reluctant because of it to engage in an otherwise exciting communal experience.

In conclusion then, I still think the choice of having one's music rated would actually bring more people into the bandamp community, without in any way taking away from or  diminishing the rating system for those who learn from it. It's just a way to make more people happy, without lessening the experience for those happy with the way things are. It's nothing but a suggestion to include more people - not a suggestion that threatens to change the way things work for those who enjoy ratings.