On Bomberblitz’s dj thread, is Swoodley’s no ■■■■ canning of other tracks rule destroying the fabric of the competition?
Short answer: probably not destroying it—but it is changing the culture, and whether that’s good or bad depends on what people think the competition is for.
A more nuanced take:
What the “no ■■■■-canning” rule protects
It lowers the barrier to entry. People are more likely to post unfinished, weird, or risky tracks if they won’t get dunked on.
It keeps the thread from turning into a personality contest or a roast battle, which historically can overshadow the music.
It encourages feedback to be constructive rather than performative.
What it arguably damages
DJ comps thrive on a bit of friction. When critique is overly policed, feedback can become vague (“nice vibes,” “cool track”) and less useful.
Some competitors want blunt comparisons—knowing why their track lost, not just that it did.
If enforced rigidly, it can feel like tone-policing, especially when regulars are used to sharper banter.
Is it destroying the fabric of the competition?
Probably no. What it is doing is shifting the fabric from:
competitive + adversarial + jokey
to
competitive + supportive + careful
That can feel like loss if you valued the old edge—but it’s not inherently hollowing the contest out unless:
judges stop giving specific musical reasons for rankings, or
the rule is applied inconsistently or punitively.
The real risk
Not the rule itself, but confusing “don’t ■■■■-can” with “don’t be honest.” If honest, technical, comparative critique is still allowed, the competition stays healthy. If not, it stagnates.