fixed list formatting

cfp.md

@@ -125,10 +125,10 @@ For more information, see the [ACL Policies for Review and Citation](https://www
 
 There are several cases to consider:
 
-1) *ARR + Other Venue*: ARR precludes multiple submissions. ARR will not consider any paper that is under review in a journal or another conference at the time of submission, and submitted papers must not be submitted elsewhere during the ARR review period. This policy covers all journals and refereed and archival conferences and workshops without exception (e.g., TACL, Computational Linguistics, IJCAI, SIGIR, AAAI, ICASSP, ICML, NeurIPS, etc). In addition, we will not consider any paper that overlaps significantly in content or results with papers that will be (or have been) published elsewhere, without exception.
-2) *ARR + Commitment*: The commitment process is treated as being under review for a conference. That means (a) while in an active review cycle at ARR, a paper cannot be committed to a conference, and (b) between commitment to a conference and a decision or withdrawal, a paper cannot be submitted to ARR. For example, if you got reviews in the June 2023 cycle, you cannot both commit to EMNLP (August 22nd deadline) and submit a revised version to the August 2023 ARR cycle. Note that this is a change of policy relative to the early days of ARR, when this type of dual submission was permitted for ACL and NAACL 2022.
-3) *Commitment + Commitment/Other Venue*: Whether you can commit/submit to two venues simultaneously depends on the dual submission policies of those venues. Typically, it is not permitted.
-4) *ARR + ARR*: For the sake of clarity, this policy also covers ARR itself; authors may not resubmit to ARR work that is already under review to ARR. As of 2023, ARR does not have overlapping cycles, and so this is a moot point.
+1. *ARR + Other Venue*: ARR precludes multiple submissions. ARR will not consider any paper that is under review in a journal or another conference at the time of submission, and submitted papers must not be submitted elsewhere during the ARR review period. This policy covers all journals and refereed and archival conferences and workshops without exception (e.g., TACL, Computational Linguistics, IJCAI, SIGIR, AAAI, ICASSP, ICML, NeurIPS, etc). In addition, we will not consider any paper that overlaps significantly in content or results with papers that will be (or have been) published elsewhere, without exception.
+2. *ARR + Commitment*: The commitment process is treated as being under review for a conference. That means (a) while in an active review cycle at ARR, a paper cannot be committed to a conference, and (b) between commitment to a conference and a decision or withdrawal, a paper cannot be submitted to ARR. For example, if you got reviews in the June 2023 cycle, you cannot both commit to EMNLP (August 22nd deadline) and submit a revised version to the August 2023 ARR cycle. Note that this is a change of policy relative to the early days of ARR, when this type of dual submission was permitted for ACL and NAACL 2022.
+3. *Commitment + Commitment/Other Venue*: Whether you can commit/submit to two venues simultaneously depends on the dual submission policies of those venues. Typically, it is not permitted.
+4. *ARR + ARR*: For the sake of clarity, this policy also covers ARR itself; authors may not resubmit to ARR work that is already under review to ARR. As of 2023, ARR does not have overlapping cycles, and so this is a moot point.
 
 Submissions that violate requirements 1, 2, or 4 will be desk rejected.
 
@@ -193,11 +193,11 @@ Submitting to ARR comes with a reviewing requirement. A**t least one author must
 
 Authors who will review are nominated at submission time. They must:
 
-1) Have an updated OpenReview profile, including affiliation, semantic scholar link, dblp link, ACL anthology link, and an email address where they can receive OpenReview messages. See [here](https://aclrollingreview.org/reviewerguidelines#how-to-get-assigned-to-papers-that-match-your-interests-well) for how to maximize the likelihood of well-matched review assignments.
-2) Have published at least three papers in the main computational linguistics and NLP  venues in the last 5 years. (we consider publication history recorded at ACL anthology, which covers AACL/IJCNLP, ACL, CL, COLING, CONLL, EACL, EMNLP, NAACL, LREC, and TACL). Both short and long papers count, as do Findings papers.)
-3) Once added as a reviewer, the new reviewers must complete their reviewer registration form for the cycle and set their availability to at least 4 papers within 48 hours. 
-4) The nominated authors who already have ARR reviewer profiles must also set their load for the current cycle to at least 4 papers per submission, prior to submission. In case of the same research group submitting multiple papers, it is the authors' responsibility to coordinate within the group and ensure that either different senior authors are nominated, or the senior author undertakes a proportionately higher review load and will [mentor junior subreviewers](https://aclrollingreview.org/reviewerguidelines#q-can-i-use-a-secondary-reviewer).
-5) All reviewers must familiarize themselves with the latest version of the [ARR reviewer guidelines](https://aclrollingreview.org/reviewerguidelines) and perform the reviews on time and in line with ARR requirements.
+1. Have an updated OpenReview profile, including affiliation, semantic scholar link, dblp link, ACL anthology link, and an email address where they can receive OpenReview messages. See [here](https://aclrollingreview.org/reviewerguidelines#how-to-get-assigned-to-papers-that-match-your-interests-well) for how to maximize the likelihood of well-matched review assignments.
+2. Have published at least three papers in the main computational linguistics and NLP  venues in the last 5 years. (we consider publication history recorded at ACL anthology, which covers AACL/IJCNLP, ACL, CL, COLING, CONLL, EACL, EMNLP, NAACL, LREC, and TACL). Both short and long papers count, as do Findings papers.)
+3. Once added as a reviewer, the new reviewers must complete their reviewer registration form for the cycle and set their availability to at least 4 papers within 48 hours. 
+4. The nominated authors who already have ARR reviewer profiles must also set their load for the current cycle to at least 4 papers per submission, prior to submission. In case of the same research group submitting multiple papers, it is the authors' responsibility to coordinate within the group and ensure that either different senior authors are nominated, or the senior author undertakes a proportionately higher review load and will [mentor junior subreviewers](https://aclrollingreview.org/reviewerguidelines#q-can-i-use-a-secondary-reviewer).
+5. All reviewers must familiarize themselves with the latest version of the [ARR reviewer guidelines](https://aclrollingreview.org/reviewerguidelines) and perform the reviews on time and in line with ARR requirements.
 
 The number of papers assigned to each reviewer in a given cycle depends in part on the paper matching process. To mitigate the issue of overwhelming volume of assignments, ARR has implemented a load balance check across cycles. Please note that even with four assigned papers, contributing four reviews doesn’t fully reciprocate the volunteer effort that the authors receive for their submission to complete a full review cycle (it involves not just three reviews and a meta-review from the AC, potentially with emergency substitutions, but also effort from the SACs and PCs during paper commitment).