How are complete nonsense papers being accepted to top conferences? [D]

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Got three papers to review for ICLR and five for AAMAS, and believe me the quality of these papers is insanely bad. </p> <p>I would even refrain

<!-- 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>&quot;<a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01171">Verbalized Sampling: How to Mitigate Mode Collapse and Unlock LLM Diversity</a>&quot;</p>

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Lately in the last two/three years, I have noticed ICML, Neurips becoming more prestigious than the actual journals. What is the actual reason of

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>hey all. the NeurIPS Position Paper Track just used a proprietary AI detector (Pangram) to desk-reject 18.4% of all submissions. no human review,

<!-- 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>I'm curious about your thoughts on these,</p> <p>as far as I've seen most of the comments are nitpicking about &quot;missing ablations&quot;

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Why would anyone pay large amounts of registration fees and end up with empty poster boards and virtual presentations. Saw this happening at