« What Xmas music sounds like to Martians | Main | Uh-oh. »

December 02, 2004

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452383469e200d83436771053ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Politically-correct program committeeing:

Comments

Why did you hyphenate "politically correct"? Isn't politically an adverb?

Isn't Sariel Har-Peled a he?

Jeff Erickson

(1) Temporary-hyphenitis. Won't happen-again.

(2) Yes, but-our systems-colleague is a she.

Herve Bronnimann

Olivier Devillers once told me, and I think it's an excellent suggestion, that PCs should judge papers only as submitted, and explicitly rule out corrections submitted to a PC member after the deadline, etc. I'm speaking mostly of the case where a paper presents a very good result but the proof is flawed, as pointed out by a PC member (sometimes determined by interaction with the authors during the evaluation process). It happened that a fix was found relatively easily and was "promised" in the final version. In that case, Olivier's position was that the paper should be rejected and resubmitted with the fix to another conference. Not all on the PC agreed, however, whence the polemics. But I agree with Olivier on this point (even though it was my paper that was hanging in the balance)!

Herve Bronnimann

Sorry, shouldn't have used the word "very good result". In truth the result wasn't that good :-) but it's not hard to generalize the discussion to other "very good" cases, and even then I would stand by Olivier's opinion.

Herve Bronnimann

Especially since a "very good" paper would get admitted to other conferences easily anyway.

Better stop those comments-to-comments-as-an-afterthought now.

The comments to this entry are closed.