Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ukamal6 t1_j59rey7 wrote

About the trainwreck review part, I totally agree with you. Even after the deadline, I was getting random (I am saying random because I had almost close to zero expertise in those fields, so I had to decline all those requests) emergency review invitations which made me understand the overall situation. One thing that made me really confused was: why did they take so much time (almost 2 months, after the author discussion period was over) to send out the decision? I was really not sure why the meta-review process deserved this much time (~60 days) when the actual review time was just 12 days! Any thoughts about this?

3

AdMassive9465 t1_j59s6n6 wrote

Agreed. I don't know what happened behind the curtains, and I hope that whatever happened was done for a good reason.

Yet, I have a bad aftertaste: I cannot stop thinking that my effort was useless. Truly, I could have written shit-reviews such as "no novelty, the paper ultimately describes a method related with neural networks, which have been studied for decades" (jk) and forget about it.

6