Tags: * for ARR * for short review cycle * make reviewer stats available
"Overall I support the ARR experiment and believe it is a significant improvement over the previous
situation. Being able to submit and get a review within 2 months at ANY point in time in the year is
really valuable given the pace of research these days. I definitely support a longer (8 week) cycle,
to not have quality reviewers burn out. Also definitely support a no-reason-needed ability to ask for
new reviewers. Over time, it would be great to see basic reviewer activity statistics (with permission)
such as a reviewer's distribution of scores given, frequency of reviews, topics / tracks reviewed, etc.
Showing this at least to the meta reviewers may help give further context to how to handle the particular
review. "