Updating arxiv papers
I think it would better to put the ar Xiv information which identifies the document in the "Loc in Archive" field.
That way you'd still know the real source of the document, but you'd have the information on the published version for citations.
I believe it is a universal phenomenon: when you're swamped with work, you suddenly feel the irresistible urge to do something else. Back in January (2016), right after the submission deadline of NAACL'16, Chris Dyer famously (?
Although the conferences almost always guarantee faster decision making, it's a binary decision without much possibility of any revision.
The only way to salvage a rejected paper is to wait for another conference in the same year, or for the same conference in a subsequent year.
In his "Proposal for a new publishing model in Computer Science," he argues that "[m]any computer [s]cience researchers are complaining that our emphasis on highly selective conference publications, and our double-blind reviewing system stifles innovation and slow the rate of progress of [s]cience and technology." This is a valid concern, as we have observed that the rate of progress in computer science has largely overtaken the speed of publication process.Furthermore, as the focus (and assessment) has moved from journals to so-called top-tier conferences, more and more papers get stuck in the purgatory of submit-review-reject-resubmit.