In light of the recent discussions on the *ACL reviewing process on Twitter, I want to share some thoughts.
Do We Need Peer Review? Specifically, do we need double-blind peer review of the sort that conferences provide?
I’m in full agreement with Ryan that it is an essential service for the scientific community. As scientists, our job is to develop and capture knowledge. Peer review ensures that the work of the least-advantaged members of our community is judged by the same standards as the most-advantaged members.