• MotoAsh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yea, “should be”, but as said, if it’s not literally directly relevant even while being in the paper, it might get skipped. Lazy? Sure. Still understandable.

    A more apt coding analogy might be code reviewing unit tests. Why dig in to the unit tests if they’re passing and it seems to work already? Lazy? Yes. Though it happens far more than most non-anonymous devs would care to admit!

    • bedrooms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      No, “should be” as in, it must be reviewed but can be skipped if there’s a concern like revealing the author identity in a double-blind process.