There's a fun pair of viewpoints in the September CACM by Jeffrey Ullman and myself on experiments in computer science research, with him addressing systems conferences(/people) being far too focused on experiments as the research validation methodology, and me addressing theory conferences(/people) being almost strangely averse to experimental results. (This link may bring you a digital version of his viewpoint, and this link to mine.) I hope they might be interesting reading or food for thought. As someone who works in both camps, I find this separation -- which we both seem to think is growing -- worrisome for the future of the CS research community.
We actually wrote these up about a year ago (or maybe longer). Jeff wrote something on the topic on Google+, and I responded. I think he got drafted into writing something for CACM, and then I got drafted in later. There was a pretty thorough reviewing process, with a couple of back and forth rounds; then there was a non-trivial wait for publication. This seems OK to me -- I'm glad CACM has a non-trivial queue of items for publication. Overall it was a thorough and reasonably pleasant publication experience, and it's appealing that CACM offers a platform for these types of editorial comments.