ccshan
2019-4-16 15:09:16

AX BZ CY.


carette
2019-4-16 15:24:30

The AX gives us hope! The BZ is closer to a non-review and is largely positive.


carette
2019-4-16 15:27:23

The CY review starts with ‘Wow’. It seems we got knocked purely on ‘technically dense’. [Obviously this person has never read any recent paper from Patrick Cousot!] And, of course, I have some sympathy with reviewer A’s point-of-view…


carette
2019-4-16 15:28:44

I think our response is going to be rather easy to write — there is very little to respond to!


carette
2019-4-16 15:30:27

If it gets rejected this time, I seriously think we should go to a journal instead. [No, I’m not going to suggest we split it into several papers, not yet anyways.]


samth
2019-4-16 16:35:38

the C review’s only real complaint is that we have too many contributions


samth
2019-4-16 16:35:43

so that should be easy to respond to


carette
2019-4-16 16:37:45

How would you respond to that, in a way to hopefully get C’s response to move to at least a B?



ccshan
2019-4-17 02:51:04

@samth I just want to make sure that the snark you put in the beginning is calculated.


samth
2019-4-17 02:54:18

It’s intentional, but maybe not a good idea