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