arXiv says it will no longer accept computer science (CS) category review articles and position papers unless they have been accepted at a journal or a conference and complete successful peer review.
But then in the details, it turns out that the work doesn't just have to be accepted, it also has to be published with a DOI, and it can't be published by a workshop at a conference, as "the review conducted at conference workshops generally does not meet the same standard of rigor of traditional peer review".
Unless my published position paper is not open access, what value would there be in putting it on arXiV after it has already been published?
And as a workshop organizer who takes peer review seriously, I feel a bit insulted. This workshop/conference distinction seems particularly harsh when many CS conferences have more workshop papers than conference papers, and the workshops, as highly focused venues, can have higher quality peer-review than the parent conference.
And finally, conferences publish non-peer reviewed work (such as invited papers), which seems to mean that this new policy isn't really going to work like the moderators think it will.
As an AEiC of @joss, I understand that dealing with AI-generated papers is a challenge, but I feel like this change is going to harm the community more than it will help it.
