Post #1160135
2026-04-15 11:30 UTC
In defense of Reviewer 2.
Dear Reviewer 2: Reviewers 1 and 3 snarked uselessly. You, however, did a damn fine job giving me actionable changes, sight reading the missing recall stat from my own graph, pointing out what it meant to my theory, and making my work better. Thank you.
Love, someone going to the conference and who has a brand new peer-reviewed publication thanks to your "weak accept". I ain't proud; I'll take it.
Replies (1)
-
@jon@cyberdeck.social 2026-04-15 11:41
@Tarah Counterpoint: Reviewer 2 once told me I'd mispelled my name. (It was, in fact, spelled correctly.) Reviewer 2 submitted, this time, but they're still a raging chaos demon. -- Still, congrats!