Super basic question here. Currently, our proofs require all proof owners to make a decision on reviews. It's easy to go in and check "not relevant" but I was wondering if I should be assigning a different role to myself as the owner to not have it show reviews overdue on our reporting. If I set it to "read only" will I lose all permissions of being the owner of the review?
Yeah, it wasn't a great experience for us to have our proof creators have to make a decision. We have our templates set to have the proof creator/owner only in the first stage, and set as a Reviewer, not a Reviewer & Approver. Then, the second stage starts upon proof creation for the person/people responsible for the Reviewer & Approver role (then any additional stages are set up as needed). I don't have experience with the read-only permission, but I would suggest against using it. Reviewer works to keep the proof owner's permissions, but doesn't show up as late on reports (as long as that second stage starts upon proof creation).
I agree with @Sheri_Whitten on having proof owners as a Reviewer role. We don't even use stages most of the time, regardless they should be Reviewer in my opinion. Read Only isn't great bc they won't have the option to make or answer comments in the proof (if they need to answer a question in the proof or anything else).
If you have users that are typically proof owners that are most of the time not proof approvers, set their default role in your Proof contacts. I did this a while ago and it has helped a lot to not have the owner change their role every time (in your Proof contacts you can set a default proof role for anyone - I did this for all our creative team, who are mostly never approvers of a proof).