If the map is fun to play then the map is good. Readability is subjective, if you are good you can usually read hard stuff, if you are not then well you can't and it's not the mappers fault but yours, get better and stop crying. Saying jumps/SV changes/whatever is overused is subjective too, I can't stand to play maps where there are few jumps/SV changes/hard patterns because I get bored. See how it works?D33d wrote:
Actually, citing Remmy and Roddie as examples, the complaints were more along the lines of "Nobody cares about spacing, actual readability etc." You know, certain guidelines which ought to be followed and not excused with "oh, just read by the hitcircles" or any other flimsy excuse. This sort of thing--the sorts of good habits which can actually make it possible to be more creative with patterns--could easily be scrutinised by staff members who know what they're doing. I don't necessarily making all of a map's spacing consistent either; rather, taking some form of action when a ranked map has loads of gimmicks which don't actually relate to the music. Other than that, a map which overdoes certain quirks--whether it's sloppy jumps everywhere or annoying SV changes--could surely be questioned in regards to its quality.
These are the types of things which could make me wonder why something was ranked, but there'd be plenty of other reasons to think that something has failed on a technical level. There may also be reasons to think that something has failed on a musical level, or simply on an appropriateness level, but my point is that there are those with experience who have valid reasons to complain about quality.
I don't know who Reddie or Remmy are, but you gave two examples of things they whined about and both are dumb, "I can't read this" = "this is too hard for me", caring for spacing is subjective, most maps I see have "proper" spacing at least, if you don't like it that doesn't mean it's wrong.