Am I crazy to think that the UAI authors are confusing the discussion deadline w

<table> <tr><td> <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/1sj76a2/just_did_an_analysis_on_iclr_2025_vs_2026_scores/"> <img alt="Just did an analysis on ICLR 2025

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Today officially marks the end of the author-reviewer discussion period. The acknowledgement deadline has already passed by over 3 days and our

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>As a fellow ML researcher, I feel disheartened and discouraged after seeing the experiences of people who submitted their work to ICML 2026.

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>What is your opinion on long appendices in conference papers?</p> <p>I am observing that appendix lengths in conference papers (ICML, NeurIPS,

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>We submitted our first paper to ARR, intending to commit to IJCNLP-AACL. Area: Multilingualism and Cross-Lingual NLP</p> <p>Scores: (3,4) (2.5,3)

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Out of curiosity, if you were a reviewer or author, how did the review period go?</p> <p>For me, it was weird, because I gave reviews with

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Hi, I am currently making the jump to ML from theoretical physics. I just got done with the review period, went from 4333 to 4433, but the

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Just as the title says, I believe the decision to extend the deadline for reviewers to post their final justifications while not allowing authors