MyConference 2002 Paper Review Form
General Review Information
CyberChairPRO: A PC Chair's Best Friend
Richard van de Stadt
1 - How do you classify this submission?
A: I will champion this submission at the PC meeting (Advocate/Accept).
B: I can accept this submission, but I will not champion it (accept, but could reject).
C: This submission should be rejected, though I will not fight strongly against it (reject, but could accept).
D: Serious problems. I will argue to reject this submission (Detractor).
2 - What is your overall expertise concerning the subject areas of this submission?
X: I am an expert.
Y: I am knowledgeable in the area, though not an expert
Z: I am not an expert. My evaluation is that of an informed outsider.
3 - What is the relevance of this paper for MyConference 2002?
S: Significantly relevant.
M: Marginally relevant
4 - Comments for the Program Committee only (NOT sent to the authors)
5 - Summary of the submission (sent to the authors)
6 - Evaluation, including points in favor and against, and comments for improvement (sent to the authors)
7 - Co-reviewer(s) for this submission (included in the proceedings, one per line)
Would you like to receive a copy of your review per e-mail?
Click the button left below to store your review
Copyright © by Richard van de Stadt (
Borbala Online Conference Services
Linux system administration:
Tec de Monterrey, Campus Guadalaraja, Mexico