Tags: * poor ARR meta/review quality * improve openreview interface
"Thanks for taking time to collect feedback for the reviewing process. In my subjective view there are
a few things that are problematic and I'm not sure how they can be solved or improved myself: - Reviewers:
Allocating papers to very junior reviewers (e.g., some of the Phd students or even Masters or undergrads)
introduces low quality reviews. Not all but most, and that's based on my experience as an area-chair/Action
editor. Often they have a narrow view of what is good or not and they can be more harsh than it needs
to. - The OpenReview system is very difficult to navigate. Even after so long using it, it doesn't get
any easier. In my small part of the world, we have had multiple PhD students who have given up publishing
through ARR or one even quit academic world through disappointments of getting unfair reviews. This
should not happen. "