Comment 199

next comment

Tags: * adopt ICLR model * distribute submissions over year * for rolling review * poor ARR meta/review quality

"The ARR system was a great trial. I loved certain aspects, but also hated some, and some seemed as 
pointless changes. 1. What I loved is the integrated reviewing system and that each paper continues 
to be reviewed by the same reviewers. 2. What I hated as a reviewer is how the same paper kept coming 
in with no significamt changes! 3. What I hated as an author is how poor the review qualities were. 
This needs serious improvement. I think following the ICLR reviewing system (truly Open Reviews) will 
help improve this a lot. 4. What I thought as pointless was how the papers were only submitted just 
before each conference deadlines. This does not conform to the original thought of distributing the 
review load during these periods. Hence, there should be a better way to deal with this. In the end, 
it only takes longer to get the final conference decision."