fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 3 days agoReal Talkmander.xyzexternal-linkmessage-square31fedilinkarrow-up1509arrow-down11
arrow-up1508arrow-down1external-linkReal Talkmander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 3 days agomessage-square31fedilink
minus-squareryedaft@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15·2 days agoOOP really overestimating how many people read a paper. It’s about publishing as many papers as possible, not proofreading.
minus-squareHiddenLychee@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·2 days agoIf I found all my reviewers paid this little attention I would contact the editors and demand new ones lmao
minus-squareryedaft@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 days agoSo you don’t think editors send out complete garbage that they should have rejected themselves?
minus-squareHiddenLychee@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 days agoI mean I haven’t reviewed many papers myself, but I haven’t gotten something that made me think it should have been desk rejected. I suppose that happens though
OOP really overestimating how many people read a paper. It’s about publishing as many papers as possible, not proofreading.
If I found all my reviewers paid this little attention I would contact the editors and demand new ones lmao
So you don’t think editors send out complete garbage that they should have rejected themselves?
I mean I haven’t reviewed many papers myself, but I haven’t gotten something that made me think it should have been desk rejected. I suppose that happens though