A little while ago, we had a brief discussion in comments about some apparent infelicities in blind review procedures. I'd like to subject this issue to a more complete discussion. Blind review procedures are deeply important; they are what separates us from the animals.*
Ideally, nobody who is in a position to evaluate a paper should be in a position to know the identity, institutional affiliation, career point, or other potential latent-bias-activating characteristics of the author. My question is, do any journals actually follow real, serious blind-review procedures? If so, which ones? Which journals almost follow them? Where do they deviate? Which journals don't follow them at all? And how can we get them all to be rigorously blind?
* That and maybe some other things.