So would you rather base your writing on what others think about it? I'm having the same dilemma. I wrote a rough draft several years ago that many people read and LOVED but I never got any offers from agents. There's a fine line between writing for yourself and writing to sell the book.
I think all writers have to base the quality of their writing on what others think about it, whether it's editors, agents, or general readers. We all want to improve, but only others can tell us whether we're any good.
But here's the thing, I always write for myself. I write the kind of story I want to write, and I write it the way I want it written. Only others, however, can tell me whether I've succeeded, and when something I absolutely love doesn't sell, I have to assume I got it wrong, and I move on.
It's the other side of the question that, I think, matters most. It's what do you do when you firmly believe something you wrote stinks on ice, but see no way of improving it? I follow Heinlein's Rules and submit it, anyway, and far more often than not, it sells. Sometimes it draws praise from all over the place, and makes me a lot of money.
So, I think it sucks, but it sells, readers love it, and it makes me good money. I have to assume this means it was a lot better than I thought. This also means I have to assume I'm often just as wrong when I think something I write is great.
So I've learned to not worry about it. I write the story I want to write, and write it the way I think it reads best. Then I put it in submission and move on to the next project.