facct-author-response
Use when drafting ACM FAccT author responses — the short factual-correction rebuttal after preliminary reviews, and, distinctively for the 2026-new process, the Revise-and-resubmit round where you address Area-Chair-prioritized concerns from a mixed CS+law+social-science panel, map each to a concrete change, and survive a re-review while keeping mutual anonymity.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill facct-author-response --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# FAccT Author Response Use this after FAccT reviews are released. FAccT has **two distinct speaking turns**, and conflating them is a common mistake: a **short rebuttal** for factual corrections, and — if you receive a **Revise** decision (new for the 2026 edition) — a full **revision plus response** that addresses Area-Chair-prioritized concerns and is **re-reviewed**. Both must respect mutual anonymity: nothing you write may reveal authors, institutions, field sites, or a repository owner. ## Triage (both turns) - Answer what affects the decision: relevance and framing, correctness, depth of exposition, honest treatment of strengths **and** limitations, and — often decisive at FAccT — the reality of the harm and the care taken with affected people. - Answer **each reviewer on the axis they raised**, including the out-of-field reviewer. A legal or qualitative objection is not noise to be waved off with a metric. - Correct factual misreadings first; a reviewer who misread a subgroup table or a consent procedure is often persuadable. - Keep every word anonymous — do not name your system's real name, your institution, your field site, your IRB, or a private repository, even to stren
- Triage (both turns)
- Turn 1 — the short rebuttal
- Turn 2 — the Revise-and-resubmit response (the distinctive FAccT-2026 move)
- Reviewer pushback patterns
- Anonymity in the response (easy to slip)
- Calibration
- Output format
What does the facct-author-response skill do?
Use when drafting ACM FAccT author responses — the short factual-correction rebuttal after preliminary reviews, and, distinctively for the 2026-new process, the Revise-and-resubmit round where you address Area-Chair-prioritized concerns from a mixed CS+law+social-science panel, map each to a concrete change, and survive a re-review while keeping mutual anonymity.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill facct-author-response --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.