"it is a horrible paper, unsuited for publication. Moreover you forgot to cite extremely important foundational papers, such as Reviewer2 et al. (2018,2019,2022,2024) as well as Randomguy and Reviewer2 (2022)." Jokes aside one time I got something along the lines of "there's already so many issues after a brief read that I won't bother reading it all and wouldn't be surprised if the editor decided to reject it straight away. Moreover I'm not familiar with your methodology but won't bother reading the appendix."
2026-07-12 08:48:12
85
_xrhstos_p_ :
Tbf mine were really helpful and cited exactly what needed to change , their reviews were pretty fair
2026-07-12 15:16:20
2
butterfly_new :
and why is it always reviewer 2 😭
2026-07-12 11:13:10
25
Dirk Molitor :
So true 😂😂😂 that happened multiple times to me after having published >20 scientific papers
2026-07-11 11:45:49
15
fyiopi :
This is a logical disconnect that undermines the whole paper 😭😭😭
2026-07-12 11:34:57
1
The Virtuous Corner :
And they say they strive for an objective standard of evaluating 😅 and don’t even get me started with grades.
2026-07-12 07:33:55
4
SprecoDiCarbonio :
PERCHÉ FANNO COSÌ
2026-07-12 13:30:20
1
VZJQQ :
Iconic moment
2026-07-12 06:47:10
1
Dirk Molitor :
#300under30
2026-07-11 11:46:06
0
To see more videos from user @lifeofocti, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.