The rebuttal phase is where the conversation gets real, and this update from the community tells us something important: most papers are still in play. When 70% of submissions are under review, that's not a signal to panic. It's a signal to prepare. The thread creator did the practical thing by opening a space for discussion early, and that's exactly the kind of move that separates productive rebuttals from reactive ones.
What this means for you is straightforward. If your paper is in that 70%, you have a clear window to clarify, not to defend. The reviewers have already told you what they see as gaps. Your job is to show them what they might have missed, without dismissing their concerns. This is where the human element matters most. A rebuttal is not a counterattack. It's a chance to align your work with the reviewer's perspective, to say, "Here's how your feedback improves the final result." That kind of approach works because it treats the process as collaborative, not combative.
The remaining 30% might feel like they're in a different boat, but the takeaway is similar. Whether your paper is under review or already in a decision state, the rebuttal phase is about clarity. It's about making sure your contributions are visible and your reasoning is easy to follow. If you're unsure about how to frame a response, start with the simplest explanation of what your paper does and why it matters. Then build from there. The reviewers are people too, and they respond well to direct, respectful communication.
So here's the concrete point: use this time to reread your paper with fresh eyes. Look for the spots where a reader might stumble, and prepare concise, specific answers for those moments. The thread you're participating in is a tool, but the real work happens in your own preparation. When the rebuttal window opens, you'll be ready to engage with confidence, not because you've won anything yet, but because you've done the work to make your position clear. That's what moves the needle.