Last week people shared their horror stories on “The Worst Reviewer/Editor Comments You’ve Received“. But refereeing papers and editing journals is crucial and often underappreciated work, and, as some noted, sometimes the comments can be extremely helpful or encouraging or otherwise appreciated. (more…)
By request, here is a spot for you to tell us about the harsh, insulting, devastating, stupid, nonsensical, mean, unhelpful, contradictory, and otherwise objectionable comments you’ve received from peer reviewers and editors on your work. (more…)
“Here’s a radical suggestion, using the only weapon/motivational device editors have: If someone fails to fulfill their duties as referee, the journal will not accept submissions from that referee.” (more…)
How can we make journal editing more transparent? That’s the question of a timely article in the recent issue of Metaphilosophy, “Why not Open the Black Box of Journal Editing in Philosophy? Make Peer Reviews of Published Papers Available,” by Caroline Schaffalitzky de Muckadell and Esben Nedenskov Petersen (both of the University of Southern Denmark).
Fallacy Ref is the creation of Glen Welch, a performing arts critic for Red Publication. It’s “a series of image macros featuring an NFL referee calling fouls on invalid argument tactics and sneaky rhetoric.” Some examples: