I think my reviewer is AI, I am not sure how to proceed without compromising meaning and content
The university is holding a somewhat obligatory symposium. At the initial stage, I was asked to upload an extended abstract. I have never uploaded an extended abstract first; usually they ask for it for publication later. Anyway. The word limit was 2000. I kept it 1000 with references. The reviewer writes, " Keep it to a maximum of 300; 1000 is reaching the usual symposium abstract limits". Hey, your guidelines state a maximum of 2000.
I sent an email to the organising committee, they replied, in sum, "base your revision with respect to the guidelines, but not the reviewer feedback". And in reviewer feedback, there is a sentence starting 'from what I can extract from the text'. I have a strong sense that my reviewer is an AI agent.
I am not sure how to proceed. It is already unprofessional, and I am not feeling comfortable at all. But it is sort of obligatory, so I have to proceed. Professors from my department are not comfortable at all too, about how the process is handled by the organizing committee.
What is best to do? I am strongly considering letting AI revise my abstract because this whole process is absurd now.