[TYPES/announce] Two phase reviewing for POPL; a response

[Prakash Panangaden]

Thanks to Simon Peyton-Jones for sharing his articulate and 
well-reasoned thoughts with us.  I agree that there are too few papers 
accepted at the best conferences and that the problem is not quality of 
reviewing.  I would like to push for the idea that we accept many more 
papers (perhaps double the present number) and present them at poster 
sessions and have them appear in the proceedings as is done at most of 
the big AI conferences.  Then we could have a smaller number presented 
as conference presentations.  The other point I would like to make is 
that we as reviewers are far too obsessed with polished but incremental 
papers and in the theory conferences (STOC/FOCS/LICS/ICALP) with "hard 
but boring" problems.  It is indeed hard to change the culture, but 
conferences are where we should get the chance to throw out ideas rather 
than participate in a lek.
Cheers
Prakash