SPLASH Organisers Discussion and AMA
summary
Conversation reports concrete, actionable changes and tradeoffs: SIGPLAN plans a SIGPLAN track for missed presentations across conferences in 2026, review scale hits ~600 submissions prompting a reserve reviewer policy and heavy use of associate editors at roughly 50:1 workload, chairs pilot going back to a single submission round, artifact evaluation accepts conditional papers as a compromise so badges are possible, budgets run around $500k per conference and SIGPLAN turnover ~$2.5–3M, LLM misuse is noted but rare and CARES/ACM channels exist for ethical complaints.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (20)
- 0:00SPLASH organizers discussion intro
- 1:04Why AMA format
- 3:08Visa issues and SIGPLAN track
- 7:23Review process challenges
- 15:31Loss of in-person PC meetings
- 21:10ICFP collocation and future plans
- 22:55Conference costs and planning
- 27:25Budget constraints and sustainability
- 31:45Single vs two review rounds
- 34:12Fraud detection and review integrity
- 40:13Complaint and feedback channels
- 43:21Growth in submissions and review load
- 48:27Ethical concerns and ACM CARES
- 50:37Encouraging student participation
- 52:43Post-pandemic financial challenges
- 56:15Paper submission portal
- 57:40SIGPLAN financial transparency
- 1:01:51Artifact evaluation deadlines
- 1:06:46Open review model
- 1:08:53Artifact evaluation and acceptance
