I don't really agree. I think it is valuable to push novel and influential results into visible venues and to reward work of this kind. It is critical to unders

I don't really agree. I think it is valuable to push novel and influential results into visible venues and to reward work of this kind. It is critical to understand how this introduces bias into the process and to consider this when reading a given paper, but I'm not sure that a review system that only considers experimental rigor would be desirable.