Tags: * reviewing record should be factor in paper recommendation * increase acceptance rate for findings
"I strongly suggest that the final score for a paper should be based on the reviewer's reviewing record.
The review process is quite an objective process making the scores from different reviewers quite incomparable.
Therefore, whether one paper can or cannot be accepted is heavily determined by whether it meets the
nice reviewer instead of the paper's quality. I understand it's hard to find suitable reviewers, but
nowadays, it becomes harder and harder to learn anything from current review comments. To me, the comments
just say that the reviewers are trying to reject the paper and they are looking for some reasons. I
also suggest increasing the accept ratio at least for the Findings track. Too many random reviews make
a lot of good paper immersed in the noise. As a young researcher, I always feel the reviewing process
approximates a lottery ticket drawing process which has nothing to do with the paper quality. If we
really cannot select good papers from a bunch of writings, please admit the situation and increase the
ratio. Admitting the problem is much better than pretending we are working hard towards an impossible
goal. "