What problem does it solve? Once a call for papers closes, organizers face hundreds of proposals, a handful of slots, and no defensible process for choosing between them. This Skill turns a raw submission pool into a documented selection process: who reviews, on what rubric, with what anonymization depth, and what every submitter hears back. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Committee and rubric design: Chooses between a small consensus committee, solo curation, a multi-tier cascade, or a distributed reviewer pool, each paired with its matching scoring scale (letter-grade advocate, multi-criteria star, or numeric 0-3). - Anonymization and conflict-of-interest execution: Implements blind review at platform-hiding or dedicated-anonymizer depth, briefs reviewers on recusal rules, and pre-decides arbitration for disputes. - Decision communication: Sequences acceptances, waitlists, and declines with templates, confirmation deadlines, and per-proposal feedback rules. - Use Case: Your conference received 190 proposals for 22 slots and six organizers can review. Use this Skill to set up the committee, replace a naive 1-5 average with the advocate scale, fix a cut rule before ranking, and draft the accept, waitlist, and decline emails in the correct order. ## Quick Start Ask the Skill to design the review committee, scoring rubric, and notification sequence for your conference's CFP submissions, stating your proposal count, slot count, and reviewer headcount.
