I'm sorry, but I can never agree with people who say eyecandy and theme is more important than it really is in terms of weighting. Yes, the level has to look normal and understandable, and not look clustered and disgusting to the eye, but really? People don't care if a level looks good, they just want it to look playable. See semi and bblair for examples. Yes, I try myself for eyecandy, but that's only just to satisfy myself, I really never expect it to get me a higher rating. Gameplay is (as Grytolle and Derby say(s)), 8x more important than eyecandy, and originality isn't even worth a section, yes, it can score you extra points but generally, I'd refer to how Derby reviews levels to get an accurate depiction of how I think reviews/ratings should be weighted.

If you're too lazy, it's "Functional Appearance" at 10%, "Visual Appearance" at 10%, then "Gameplay" at 80%. If you're confused as to the difference between functional appearance, this involves how easy it is to understand the level as such from looking at it. Visual appearance, goes more under eyecandy, theme and tilebugs. Gameplay is self-explanatory.

However, a judge must really be taking all of these things into account. So how about we actually nominate who we deem to be able to do such judging then? Since this discussion isn't gonna go anywhere unless we take action.

Who do I suggest? I'll get back to you...