[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Sinosauropteryx

I don't think the Royal Society journals publish discussions, no doubt on the grounds that if it's published by the Roy. Soc. it must be true.

Which raises the question of reviewers: presumably there were at least two. One wonders what they said. Of course, just because you get bad reviews doesn't mean a paper is rejected. And, by the way, just because you get good reviews doesn't mean it gets accepted.

Sometimes if a manuscript is slammed by reviewers, the authors will plead prejudice, and an editor will instruct the authors to revise the paper "taking into account" the criticisms. When the revision comes in, the editor may not want to go through the bother of re- reviews, and just prints the "revised" manuscript as is, despite the fury of the reviewers and the scorn of readers. Print them all and let God sort them out. It's clear that some journals are more prone to that syndrome than others.