Very interesting approach. Not sure I buy the efficiency claim, but I can see how a team might see some efficiency long term on certain projects.

Although, a lot of the issues with code reviews can be solved with Loom videos over written text, as well as quick “huddles” if a deeper discussion is needed on something. If there is a lot of ping pong in a code review, it means there’s a gap in understanding / communication between the reviewer and the author, but that’s more of a process problem than an issue with code reviews themselves