> But who decides what's constructive? For a start, it would be good if as an author I could give feedback on review quality. Rebuttal periods are becoming sta

> But who decides what's constructive? For a start, it would be good if as an author I could give feedback on review quality. Rebuttal periods are becoming standard for computer science conferences, and you can put some feedback into your rebuttal, but if you are too frank about bad reviewers, they could decide to recommend rejection. It would be good to add an option to review reviewers after the final decision on the paper has been made. I do think that that would make (some) reviewers more constructive. A few conferences do have distinguished reviewer awards, though I've never really seen explained how the winners are chosen.