Tags: * against revise-and-resubmit * Martin Haspelmath on revise-and-resubmit: href=https://dlc.hypotheses.org/2333 * against ARR * ARR bad for diversity
"I oppose the fundamental idea behind rolling review. Diversity of conferences is good. We should acknowledge
that (1) reviewing is an inherently random and subjective process, *this is fine* (it's how humans work)
but the multiplicity of venues is a healthy way of guaranteeing that a good paper will find its home,
while acknowledging diversity and not turning into a monolithic system. Every resarch field has a multiplicity
of top venues (be it journals or conferences). (2) revise and resubmit has problems, giving the reviewers
too much power, basically I subscribe to the views posted here (I'm not the author): https://dlc.hypotheses.org/2333
- while it does have advantages too, I think we had the best of both worlds with the possibility of
submitting to venues with (CL, TACL) or without (conferences) revise and resubmit. It's not good to
have all venues use it. I honestly fail to see what we have gained with ARR, given that it doesn't seem
to have reduced stress for reviewers either."