I think you’re wrong here. That is very subjective. I’ll give you an example just based on myself.
I have gone through a few audition required sites. A couple have accepted me, but others have rejected. I have another site (not audition required) where my music has been featured on their Instagram posts on more than one occasion. On this same site, I also have a hefty collection of my tracks which are featured on a curated collection for a certain group of buyers.
What is it that this site sees in my music that the audition site (who rejected me) didn’t see? Even still, what is it that the audition site (who accepted me) saw in my music that the other audition site didn’t see? Not only are curators subjective in their ability to discern what is good, bad, or whatever, they are subjective in tastes as well. What I think are my best 3-5 tracks may not be what a particular audition site thinks will be. That’s why I say it is a crap shoot. Tell me how this is otherwise. If you want such a selective site (there already are some anyway) then why not start one yourself? No question they need to clamp down on saturation, but there are other ways to do that, like ID requirements, submissions limits and even more selective curators. I just don’t agree with shutting out composers based on a couple of their tracks. I don’t get your angle here. Do you want to close the door to new composers on Audio Jungle so that you become Grandfathered in, so that you will have a better chance on here?