So if you read my previous entry, I laid out a bunch of personal rules for instances where I'd give a submission a zero. Mostly that was just to get it off my chest, because I was frustrated at seeing yet another crappy "beta" submission, and no, you shouldn't adopt the list as your own; each submission should be judged on its own merits, because that's how the portal is meant to work.
But.
When you come across a submission that matches one of those criteria, pay attention to its quality. My news entry was me venting, but I didn't pick the things I included there at random. With the exception of the work-in-progress one, I'm pretty sure you'll find that the vast majority of submissions that match one of those criteria - and damn near 100% of submissions that match more than one - are bad. Don't take my word for it - never take someone else's word for something you can test yourself - but pay attention. The trends are out there.
Cyberdevil
I just tried searching for 'teaser' to see if it's true (that teasers are shit), it turns out... submissions with 'teaser' in the title are usually all but shit. That doesn't say much about the overall trend in such a content type though, but there's no easy way to filter that.
About submission size btw, back in the day the biggest submissions were often the crappiest ones, using filler content to make them look bigger. I'd think that still applies to a nice slice.