看来，在学术的立场上，我并没有犯错。I do not understand the issue of the respondents. Why against anonymity? This is not an issue of who judge who but the contents. I know it is more difficult to judge an article in Social Sciences.
In our publication, we do not know who are the three referees that commented on our paper but we always have the right to argue with the referees while the editor act as the chief judge. Five people committee is good enough if they can say why an article is not considered. Sometimes, if it is too controversial, they will ask another expert to look at it for the final say before the editor make the decision to include or drop.
Normally the proceedings will come out about 6 months after the conference. Time is given for them to correct and to complete the article after they have been selected. Usually the article can stand by itself but we check for errors or put in important references or rewrite a certain section from feedback of the audience.
It is not true that all articles selected will be given an honororium. No need to do that as being selected is already an honour. Therefore, I do not see that it is necessary to make an announcement before hand and it is all up to the organiser to see whether it is in their means to publish.