Handbook for PhD Students
This PhD Handbook serves a dual purpose: it defines the research methodology of our group and gives general advice to students, and it sets out standards and processes which all students in the group are expected to strive for.
Most conferences/workshops/journals give you the option to respond to reviews for your paper (called "rebuttal"). The rebuttal should point out important errors and misrepresentations in reviews, and respond to specific questions raised by reviewers. Use explicit references to reviewers and comments, to make it easy to connect your responses to reviewer comments. Whenever possible, link your comments back to your paper to show that the paper already addresses the point ("As detailed in Section X", "As shown in Figure Y", etc).
The rebuttal should be succinct and to the point. Given that the space for rebuttals is usually limited, it is a good approach to focus on the most important/critical reviewer comments. Above all, use a polite and professional writing style, even if the reviews are unfair or badly done. You should also know who will read your rebuttal. Sometimes the rebuttal is addressed directly to reviewers who will use your comments in a discussion, and sometimes the rebuttal is only visible to the Area Chair (and not the reviewers) who will consider your comments alongside the reviews.