Review by committee sounds like not very much fun, but reading the description it could actually be kind of nice to work through one’s thoughts about a paper though web chat with (anonymous) friends. One of the big slogs with the current solitary review workflow is there’s nobody to commiserate with when the article is tricky not-very-strong-but-not-flat-reject space…
Also, I’m realizing that it would be pretty nice to be able to push back on the classic Reviewer 2 behavior before the authors have to deal with it
Review by committee sounds like not very much fun, but reading the description it could actually be kind of nice to work through one’s thoughts about a paper though web chat with (anonymous) friends. One of the big slogs with the current solitary review workflow is there’s nobody to commiserate with when the article is tricky not-very-strong-but-not-flat-reject space…
Also, I’m realizing that it would be pretty nice to be able to push back on the classic Reviewer 2 behavior before the authors have to deal with it
I'm all for this sort of experiment and wish them the best with it.
Just gonna leave this line here though:
> We’ve had to cap the number of reviewers on each article at seven, because that’s what our software can handle.
Maybe I can get an article published on 4 bit arithmetic? It'll be a significant breakthrough.
[dead]