<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">Given what everyone said, I think we should reject these 10 papers w/o review. I think the current ACM authorship policy allows us, the reviewers (and by extension, the PC chairs and SC), to do so. If we want to be nice to these authors, we can give them 24-48 hours to explain why they submitted 10 papers and what’s unique about each paper compared to the rest.<div><br></div><div>Going forward we can discuss limits on no. of submissions, new AI-related procedures, etc. Clearly the problem of “too many submissions” is a relatively new one due to AI, so we’ll have to deal with it. Placing a limit of, say 2-3 seems reasonable (e.g., before NSF imposed a 2-proposal limit in the Core programs, they got a ton of crappy proposals to review — the limit forced people to send their best work and focus on it).</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Erez.<div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Jul 14, 2026, at 8:50 PM, Ashvin Goel <ashvin@eecg.toronto.edu> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline !important;">The 10 papers were submitted by the same set of authors.</span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>