Talk:Two-phase Reviewing
From Health of Conferences Committee
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 19:48, 28 February 2006 MarkDHill (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 19:56, 28 February 2006 MarkDHill (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| == Starting Comments == | == Starting Comments == | ||
| - | qqq | + | This is more negatively, called ''quick rejection.'' For example, ICSE has used this |
| + | approach and SIGGRAPH has considered it. Papers must pass an initial | ||
| + | review by two or three reviewers before being circulated for a full complement | ||
| + | of five or six reviews. | ||
| - | qqq | ||
| - | |||
| - | qqq | ||
| == Discussion Begins == | == Discussion Begins == | ||
Revision as of 19:56, 28 February 2006
To add your comment to this discussion, please click the + sign tab above. Like an email message, you can then contribute:
- a subject (use subject Re: FOO to continue a discussion of FOO)
- message body
- (optionally) your name.
Starting Comments
This is more negatively, called quick rejection. For example, ICSE has used this approach and SIGGRAPH has considered it. Papers must pass an initial review by two or three reviewers before being circulated for a full complement of five or six reviews.
