Tags: * soften sticky meta/reviews * senior reviewers are often bad reviewers * concerns about commitment of partially reviewed papers
"1. I support replacing reviewers selectively, possibly with justification and support from the action
editor. As an action editor myself, I am very disappointed with some of the reviewers to the point I
would kick them out happily if authors support such a decision. I want reviews to be factual, but often
see are just opinions, poorly supported by evidence. 2. I am not sure we need to require a senior reviewer
to be present. My subjective opinion is that senior reviewers don't necessarily produce better reviews.
3. It's not clear how to implement commitment of papers with missing reviews or meta-reviews. If only
one review is submitted, how will the paper be judgement? Is it even fair?"