Reader's Voluminous Report: Send to Different Journal?

[quasihumanist]

It is a tendency of referees to get carried away and suggest for you an entire program of research that they, upon more sober reflection, would acknowledge is well beyond the scope of a single paper.

[mleok]

It is a tendency of referees to get carried away and suggest for you an entire program of research that they, upon more sober reflection, would acknowledge is well beyond the scope of a single paper.

Indeed, my most recent paper had a referee report bemoaning why the theoretical analysis of a new technique that I introduced in the paper wasn't as fully developed as a technique that was developed two decades ago...

[Myword]

Actually, this happened to me last month. My article was rejected with a very extensive list of revisions from 1 reviewer, after waiting a year. I did all the revisions needed, lengthening the paper a lot. He wanted it shortened which was impossible with all the add ons and new commentary. I was so aggravated. I wrote a polite and stern letter to the Editor, with my objections. He responded with apology and gave me another chance with yet more revisions. Who does this reviewer think he is? I asked myself. Will never submit anything to them.
I never responded. Sent it to a more relevant journal.

Inadvertently I got a clue who the reviewer might be. Way too demanding!

[mamselle]

Some online submission sites have a place where you can name those you'd prefer were not assigned as reviewers for your work.

Does yours?

(Hint, hint....)

M.

[Wahoo Redux]

I found that if I hovered the cursor over the comments generated by the "comment function" in Word the name of the reviewer showed up.  It was entirely accidental on my part, although I guess I knew it would do that, when reading the truly nitpicking, voluminous comments on an article that was going through its final revision.  I couldn't help myself, Googled the name, and found an "independent scholar" who I assumed had some relationship to the editor.  I think the independent scholar was flexing a bit.

I emailed the editor when I returned the article with a short note explaining that, while it was not a concern for me, I could see the reader's name in the comments.

[mamselle]

Please don't tar all independent scholars with the same brush.

Some of us try very hard to be reliable, do decent work, and give good, reflective assessments when asked to do so.

M.

[Wahoo Redux]

Please don't tar all independent scholars with the same brush.

Some of us try very hard to be reliable, do decent work, and give good, reflective assessments when asked to do so.

M.

Of course not.  I did not mean to.  In the case above, I simply assumed that the I.S. was a little too enthusiastic, that's all.  Very human.   And actually her comments were very good and improved my writing, just that she got a bit too excited about turn of phrases, headers, comma placement, etc.  Maybe she enjoyed her work a bit too much is all I meant----this very thread was started by a reader who I assume is a tenured prof somewhere and got just a bit carried away.

Who knows?  If current national trends continue I may find myself an independent scholar.  As it is, my scholarship counts for nothing professionally----I AM kind of an I.S.

Peace out.

[mamselle]

OK, thanks, just checking in.

M.

[Wahoo Redux]

OK, thanks, just checking in.

M.

Rock on, home skillet!!!