> Why aren't there a few meta-reviewers, to review the reviews? In principle, the associate editor managing the submission (and making the ultimate accept/reje

> Why aren't there a few meta-reviewers, to review the reviews? In principle, the associate editor managing the submission (and making the ultimate accept/reject decision) should be doing this for every paper. In practice, the workload is such that editors have an incentive to make the review process as automatic as possible on their end.