Comment Summary

Please indicate your current opinion about which choice is best: single-blind reviewing as is typically employed by POPL, or double-blind reviewing as described here and employed by PLDI 2010. Your answer should reflect your perception of the best choice on balance, based on which process you think is overall the most fair, most accurate, most enjoyable, etc.
#	Response Date	Optionally provide reasons or qualifications for your choice
1	Jan 8, 2011 1:56 PM	I presented a couple of papers that David Wagner mentioned at a women Eng workshop. 30-40 scientists attended my talk (including a few male scientists) and we had very good discussions. All people agreed [we should use] double-blind review.
2	Jan 5, 2011 4:25 PM	I view anonymization as a waste of the authors' time, and I don't perceive its benefits; I don't consider single-blind reviewing as unfair or biased.
3	Jan 5, 2011 12:12 PM	Double-blind reviewing is a pain but I think it does make things a bit fairer. But I think the authors should be anonymous only for the initial review.
4	Jan 5, 2011 6:14 AM	Double-blind may be more fair for younger, not so well-known people from smaller institutions when their submissions are good.
5	Jan 5, 2011 3:43 AM	I am not sure I see the benefits of double-blind reviews yet, and double-blind review comes with a cost both for authors and pc members.
6	Jan 4, 2011 3:02 PM	Will send to list.
7	Jan 3, 2011 9:37 PM	I voted for double-blind, because I liked it when I was on the reviewing side (ERC for (conference redacted)). I think it helps making us unbiased. But, it puts more burden on the paper writer's side, and so I prefer single-blind when I am submitting.
8	Jan 3, 2011 1:28 PM	I don't know if double-blind makes a significant difference, but as scientists, we are obligated to take every reasonable measure to ensure fairness and trust in peer review.
9	Jan 3, 2011 12:01 PM	I don't have enough experience with double-blind reviewing to make an informed choice. I expect it might be more fair but also slightly less enjoyable.
10	Jan 3, 2011 11:59 AM	Truthfully, I'm split. On the one hand, if double-blind solves bias problems, then I'm all for it. On the other hand, I think the biggest bias problem we have is against ideas, not people. And there's no way to anonymize the ideas. So my preference is to make reviewing as easy as possible.