imc-author-response
Use when drafting ACM IMC author responses, covering the initial-review rebuttal and — distinctively — the One-Shot-Revision resubmission that must address a bounded set of action points, keep double-blind anonymity, satisfy the reviewer champion, and be re-judged by the same reviewers at the next deadline.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill imc-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.
# IMC Author Response Use this after IMC reviews are released. IMC has **two distinct speaking turns**, and conflating them is a common mistake: a short initial rebuttal, and — if you receive a **One-Shot-Revision** — a revised paper plus a change summary that the *same* reviewers re-read at the *next* deadline against a *bounded* set of action points. Both must respect double-blind anonymity: no author, institution, testbed, or vantage-point identity may leak. ## Triage (both turns) - Answer what affects the decision: significance of the finding, vantage-point representativeness, ground truth, methodology soundness, confounds/limitations, **ethics**, and artifact availability. - Use evidence that already exists or that the revision will concretely add — never a vague promise. - Correct factual misreadings first; a reviewer who misread your coverage or your ethics handling is often persuadable. - Keep every word anonymous. Do not name your tool, institution, AS, probe account, or a private dataset URL, even to strengthen a point. ## Turn 1 — the initial rebuttal Short and decision-focused. One decision-critical point per reviewer beats an exhaustive reply. Concede what is true, cor
- Triage (both turns)
- Turn 1 — the initial rebuttal
- Turn 2 — the One-Shot-Revision (the distinctive IMC move)
- Reviewer pushback patterns
- Anonymity in the response (easy to slip)
- Calibration
- Output format
What does the imc-author-response skill do?
Use when drafting ACM IMC author responses, covering the initial-review rebuttal and — distinctively — the One-Shot-Revision resubmission that must address a bounded set of action points, keep double-blind anonymity, satisfy the reviewer champion, and be re-judged by the same reviewers at the next deadline.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill imc-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.