A bit of useful flavor of how this looks in real life: On my current team a typical code review of about 300 lines will involve about 3 to 4 reviewers, 20 comm

A bit of useful flavor of how this looks in real life: On my current team a typical code review of about 300 lines will involve about 3 to 4 reviewers, 20 comments, and maybe 10 changes, usually over the course of about 48 hours. Because this is a culture shock to people who join the company, we explicitly train every new team member ahead of time that code review suggestions are not a reflection on your code quality or your coding ability. Reviewers are expected to err on the side of raising a comment when in doubt, even (and especially) when the issue is about the approach being taken rather than the correctness of the code itself. Not every suggestion needs to be accepted, but every concern should be addressed. While not an explicit requirement, the expectation (and typical outcome) is that the committed code represents the combined expertise of the author and all the reviewers, and everyone is happy to go on the record as having been "responsible" for the code that got submitted. A zero-question LGTM isn't an indication of good code, it's a red flag for an incomplete review.