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

Re: Differences between *Vancleavea* and thalattosaurs



David Peters wrote:

> I judge referees the same way. If they have nothing "nice" to say
> about several months worth of work, then they probably have a
> personal agenda. The good ones weigh the good against the bad.


Most of us don't subject our papers to peer review because we're fishing for 
compliments.  We do it because it's a necessary part of the publication 
process.  We take our lumps, and move on.  To suggest that a not "nice" review 
is always driven by a personal agenda is (as David M. says) laughable.  The 
reviewer is probably just being honest.