What I wish is that peer review did not merge so many things into one step. Peer review is used to test for 1. The validity of the results 2. The novelty of t

What I wish is that peer review did not merge so many things into one step. Peer review is used to test for 1. The validity of the results 2. The novelty of the results 3. The importance of the results Papers are routinely rejected in peer review not because their methods or results are suspect but because their results are not seen as impactful enough to justify space in a conference or journal. This sucks and introduces all sorts of nasty biases into the community. I'd love for these to be disconnected so one could demonstrate that their paper had been read by other experts and found to be within reason without having to worry that one person on the PC who just doesn't think that a certain research direction is valuable will sink my career.