06 April 2011

Faux rigeur

Dear journal editor:

I’m perfectly okay with having manuscripts rejected.

I don’t mind in the least that you didn’t send it out to external editors for review.

But don’t try to convince me that you gave a 24 page scientific manuscript an “in depth examination”...

In eight minutes.

Even the Journal of Universal Rejection takes longer than that!

Reading the abstract and deciding it didn’t fit the journal is fine. Trying to cover that decision under the guise of faux rigeur is insulting.

Luckily, I can’t stay too mad. There’s a new season of Mythbusters starting tonight, and this import arrived in my postbox today:


Four knockout tracks, one standout, and no real clunkers. Can’t stay mad with that in my earphones.

P.S.—While this is easily a personal rejection record for me, I cannot, alas, claim it as a record, as I got one report of a manuscript rejected before it was submitted.

3 comments:

Adam said...

8 whole minutes, eh? Luxury! I recently had a manuscript rejected in slightly less than 2 minutes.

KBHC said...

Wow, my record is 2 hours. And again, I agree with you that I don't mind a fast rejection if they can tell the manuscript wouldn't be a good fit for their journal. But to send a form letter that claims to have done an in-depth review after minutes? Not cool.

May your next rejection be more sincere, but your next acceptance come sooner.

Girlpostdoc said...

How could you possibly have a manuscript rejected before you even submitted it?
@Adam that's crazy.