Please know that I understand how much work it is to do researchI can just imagine the PC sitting around a table, tears streaming down their eyes, as they pen this dejected missive to me.
and write a paper. Rejection is never fun, happens to all of us, and there is likely always an element of misunderstanding to it.
Because CONFERENCE accepts such a small percentage of papers, however, rejection from CONFERENCE may not at all mean your paper will be rejected at other high quality conferences. To that end, I encourage you to take into account the reviewers' recommendations. They have spent many hours with your paper and their remarks (and even their misunderstandings) may help you to clarify your paper or perhaps to do some more work.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
The most apologetic conference rejection I've received:
From the PC Chair:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"It's not you, it's me."
ReplyDeleteoh no! 11011110 stole my comment :( believe me, i came here to say exactly that :)
ReplyDeleteWell it certainly beats "EPIC FAIL!!1"
ReplyDeleteNot unlike my grad school rejections!
ReplyDeleteMaybe if you and David stopped wasting so much time blogging, you might get more of your papers accepted.
ReplyDeleteTo the last anonymous:
ReplyDeleteWhy waste your time making
rude comments anonymously instead
of writing one more paper?
Well, on the other had we should give credit when it is due. I also got the same missive, and I appreciate the politeness of the message, the outcome of course is a different story.
ReplyDeleteIn contrast I got another rejection from another CONFERENCE (said in deep voice) where the review was "I the reviewer do not understand it because it takes too much effort. You paper builds on previous papers published in this (deep voice) CONFERENCE long ago. We got trid of those guys, we suggest that you get rid of yourself as well."
Sudipto.
I received the same rejection from CONFERENCE, and I received an equally delicately phrased acceptance, and I was on the PC. I thought it was a very nicely done message, and I can assure you that the helpful and polite tone is entirely the work of the outstanding PC chair. He really pushed us reviewers to edit our comments so they would be helpful for future revision. The message does not necessarily reflect the natural approach of the PC members: after all, CONFERENCE is in a distinctly competitive, system-focused rather than theory-friendly, community.
ReplyDeletewhy is this such a big deal everyone, just let it out, it is SIGMOD '08.
ReplyDeleteI was not talking about SIGMOD.
ReplyDeletes.
I won't be happy unless I learn that accepted papers got a similar message stating "Congratulations, but let's be realistic, it's a bit of a lottery really, and the fact that you got three reviewers who were sufficiently baffled by your notation but too intimidated to admit to it was pure luck. Acceptance is often fun, but there is likely always an element of misunderstanding to it."
ReplyDeleteIf CONFERENCE'08 accepts such a small percentage of papers, maybe they should consider accepting more?
g.
Perhaps we should call it by its full name, CONFERENCE/SHMONFERENCE 2008.
ReplyDeleteWell, my paper was also rejected from CONFERENCE, but what's interesting is that in CONFERENCE'07, I got (accept, weak accept, reject)-> reject for the same paper. I addressed the comments, and this year, I got (weak reject, weak reject) + rude comments :-)
ReplyDelete