In article <1993Dec10.082014.26349 at comp.bioz.unibas.ch> doelz at comp.bioz.unibas.ch (Reinhard Doelz) writes:
>In article <93343.162320FORSDYKE at QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, <FORSDYKE at QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>|...
>|> brings it to mind again. 6 months ago I submitted a paper to a Canadian
>|> non-scientific journal. It was quite non-technical, about 12 pages in
>|> length, and could be read in 30 minutes or less. Recently it was returned
>|> rejected. There were no apologies for the delay and the Editor's summary
>|> of the reviewers' comments was uninformative.
>>Be lucky that you _got_ this reply. I submitted a paper to a journal
>which was launched only recently, and I received a CC'ed peer review
>which was excellent. Now as the secretary already dated me an issue
>where the paper would appear, I was hoping that there were no further
>complaints. About three months later I still didn't receive the
>proofs or suggestions for the finished to be printed paper.
>>As I inquired, I learned that the secretary was working elsewhere
>in the meantime, and that the Chief Editor has orally received
>another comment which made him think that it were better not to
>publish the paper. The Editor didn't think that it was needed to
>inform me, neither oficcialy suggest what else should be done. The whole
>procedure lasted four months.
>>Happened in 1993, in Europe. The Editor is working on behalf of a large
>organisation in Europe.
>
Since this subject has been brought up. It might actually be a good idea
for all who post "horror stories" of Journals and/or editors to
specify which journal and who the editor was. This way the rest of us
will know to stay clear of these jokers.
Roy Goodacre
____
| \ _ __
| () ) ___ ( ) ( ) Institute of Biological Sciences,
| / / \ \ \_/ / University of Wales, ABERYSTWYTH,
| |\ \ ( O ) \ / Dyfed SY23 3DA, UK.
| | \ \ \___/_ ) /
|_| \_\ ( )_/ / _ Tel: 0970 623111 ext 4187
rrg at aber.ac.uk\___/ (_) Telefax: 0970 622350
