sleeplessinseattle00
sleeplessinseattle00 t1_jdi6hot wrote
Reply to comment by paulgavrikov in [D] ICML 2023 Reviewer-Author Discussion by zy415
We’ve written a gentle note, but no reply to that. Literally ran 50 new experiments as suggested
sleeplessinseattle00 t1_jdg0u7p wrote
Reply to comment by zy415 in [D] ICML 2023 Reviewer-Author Discussion by zy415
It was a 6, and we were really hopeful that it can bump to 7
sleeplessinseattle00 t1_jdfmdtt wrote
Reply to comment by zy415 in [D] ICML 2023 Reviewer-Author Discussion by zy415
Finally got a response saying that you’re rebuttal adequately addressed my concerns. (Yet no change in the rating) 🥲 why do people do this?
sleeplessinseattle00 t1_jdeir9w wrote
Reply to [D] ICML 2023 Reviewer-Author Discussion by zy415
Haven't received any response yet. I've answered all of the raised clarification and extra experimentation, but at this point, I really can't do much if they're just gonna ghost me.
PS: I am also a reviewer and I've finished responding to all of the papers assigned in my pool.
sleeplessinseattle00 t1_ivdr71m wrote
Reply to comment by Seankala in [D] Git Re-Basin Paper Accused of Misinformation by fryingnem0
Well, twitter has also been a big platform now a days to public discussions. (I’m not saying that to not put open review comment, but I’m saying they should’ve discussed this over there as well, given the amount of reaction to this paper)
sleeplessinseattle00 t1_jdsvfhg wrote
Reply to comment by zy415 in [D] ICML 2023 Reviewer-Author Discussion by zy415
NeurIPS reviewers ghost as well, but ICLR I believe they do get involved