Subscribe in a reader






Buy Conservative Advertising

Wikio - Top Blogs

Find the best blogs at Blogs.com.


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


No one but the author bears any responsibility for the non-advertising content on this blog. AND PLEASE NOTE: the author neither necessarily uses nor endorses any product advertised on this blog.

« Three on movies | Main | That's a lot of hot dogs »

August 23, 2009

"How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 123 Easy Steps"

One commenter wrote, "First I laughed, then I cried . . ." which would have been my reaction except I couldn't stop laughing.

Astonishing.

But I believe it. Every word.

(Link via Reddit.)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c9b9953ef0120a568dd16970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 123 Easy Steps":

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

JorgXMcKie

Never had an experience that bad, but the whole process is too true, too true.

I once had a paper 'accepted' on the sole condition that it be shortened by a not insubstantial amount. After struggling and doing so, it was rejected as being 'insufficiently explanatory of your results.'

Guess I needed to be a 'Big Name'. (I knew a Very Big Name in a related field and was once amazed to see a near first-tier journal give him *17* pages for an article review which amounted to a personal attack on the authors [and possibly their parents and near relatives].)

When colleagues ask why I'm currently satisfied with 3rd authorships for constructing difficult statistical models for co-authors, I just smile and say it's about all I have time for.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Powered by TypePad
Member since 07/2003

Shelfari: Book reviews on your book blog