@fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish • 2 days agoReal Talkmander.xyzimagemessage-square31fedilinkarrow-up1500arrow-down11
arrow-up1499arrow-down1imageReal Talkmander.xyz@fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish • 2 days agomessage-square31fedilink
minus-square@ryedaft@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglish14•1 day agoOOP really overestimating how many people read a paper. It’s about publishing as many papers as possible, not proofreading.
minus-square@HiddenLychee@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish7•1 day agoIf I found all my reviewers paid this little attention I would contact the editors and demand new ones lmao
minus-square@ryedaft@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglish3•22 hours agoSo you don’t think editors send out complete garbage that they should have rejected themselves?
minus-square@HiddenLychee@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish3•21 hours 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