[17:28:51] baah [17:29:02] Nettrom, you've published before. Lots of things. Tell me. [17:29:13] Can I expect the universe to get less copyedity and hellish after Monday? [18:00:12] Ironholds: yes [18:00:42] there will be a break until the reviews come back [18:01:08] if your paper gets accepted, life will get copyedity and hellish for a second time to get the camera-ready ready [18:02:29] you'll probably also disagree strongly with many comments, only to implement them anyway and then later think that they made the paper better [18:03:13] Nettrom, I'm good on that front, I didn't write either of them. [18:03:29] "Hey, Scott, you know how to write papers, I know how to do interesting crap with geodata, let's be friends" "cool" "cool" [18:06:13] oh, reviewing other people's papers is fun! [18:06:21] remember to volunteer to review too, btw [18:06:35] * Nettrom just updated his volunteering categories [18:07:14] ooh, point [18:07:18] I am going to read ALL THE SOURCES [18:07:38] * Ironholds found a 2014 ACM pub'd paper that was actively contradicted by its cite, and since then has been incredibly paranoid about other authors' citation standards [18:08:08] "This is the industry standard!" "yes; one MINOR point - the paper you're citing to show this says, and I quote, 'in section 3.3 we show that this is no better than random'"