What's up with AAAI reviewers and organizers? [D]

My paper advanced to the second round...but...

Out of the papers I reviewed.

One did not follow the AAAI template and was unblinded. My review was two lines. The other "human reviewer" gave a list of pros and cons that were similar to the AI review.

One was incomplete (missing paragraphs, figures, code, no details). My review was also two lines. The other "human reviewer" also gave a list of pros and cons, that were similar to the AI review.

One was LLM math which I believe was actually correct, because it advanced to the second round, despite the references being at a different level of detail, and covering multiple fields of math, insufficient references for theorems / rules, and no exposition as to why the paper was actually useful / interesting. My review for that paper was the longest out of all the papers I reviewed, dotting the is and crossing the ts to make sure it wouldn't be seen as a lazy "reject" review. Yet it advanced to Phase 2.

Also, none of the AAAI workflow chairs or similar apologized or even acknowledged a mistake for spamming my coauthors about: "Your coauthor is irresponsible", because I accepted an emergency review invitation (and received these emails a few hours after accepting that invitation).

Ok rant over.