In my opinion, The poll questions are a bit vague. They propose high level concepts, but there are hundreds of potential implementations that could fall within the concept ... in the end, the devil is in the details (which in turn may impact how people would answer the poll question). Can you elaborate and/or add some detail regarding your view of what the 'idea of using multiple people for reviews' really represents?
This is explained in Related Initiatives Package. In the past, reviewers have been urged to stay with a review until it has been completed. As part of the effort to recruit new people to the process, the idea is to allow people who may not feel qualified to do a full technical review to do a partial review, consisting of licensing and module duplicaiton reviews, for example. This has the advantage of allowing more people to participate, but makes the process more difficult to manage.
I think this could help in more ways than one. As discussed on other threads, having the input of multiple reviewers can help resolve disputes and clarify issues. I think it may even result in more concise, thorough and affective reviews as different reviewers have their strengths and weaknesses.
Comments
What exactly are you proposing?
In my opinion, The poll questions are a bit vague. They propose high level concepts, but there are hundreds of potential implementations that could fall within the concept ... in the end, the devil is in the details (which in turn may impact how people would answer the poll question). Can you elaborate and/or add some detail regarding your view of what the 'idea of using multiple people for reviews' really represents?
...
This is explained in Related Initiatives Package. In the past, reviewers have been urged to stay with a review until it has been completed. As part of the effort to recruit new people to the process, the idea is to allow people who may not feel qualified to do a full technical review to do a partial review, consisting of licensing and module duplicaiton reviews, for example. This has the advantage of allowing more people to participate, but makes the process more difficult to manage.
I think this could help in
I think this could help in more ways than one. As discussed on other threads, having the input of multiple reviewers can help resolve disputes and clarify issues. I think it may even result in more concise, thorough and affective reviews as different reviewers have their strengths and weaknesses.