I have been deeply unimpressed with the ML conference track this last year... There's too many papers, too few reviewers, leading to an insane number of PhD stu

I have been deeply unimpressed with the ML conference track this last year... There's too many papers, too few reviewers, leading to an insane number of PhD student-reviewers. We've gotten some real nonsense reviews, with some real sins against the spirit of science baked into them. For example, a reviewer essentially insisting that nothing is worth publishing if it doesn't include a new architecture idea and SOTA results... God forbid we better understand and simplify the tools that already exist!