What was the rejected paper about?
-
-
-
Something naughty.
-
Genomic ancestry and outcomes, in this case.
-
Racy stuff no doubt
-
With the incorrect spin on the results too. Maybe I need to write completely dishonest articles, but still get the empirical results out. "The results indicated that Trump is evil, that socialism is good and race is an illusion invented by Evil Whitey" (Then show the usual plots)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Is this your PING study?
-
Ya. John likes to submit it to various places to see the bias. Well, another one for the list.
-
But you're not submitting to multiple journals at the same time, are you?
-
Sequentially I think.
-
Wow. Good luck. I hope you're really patient (and simultaneous submission IS unethical).
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This was a new on. I wonder how many unique excuses for rejection we can get?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Isn't there supposed to be a pretense for double blind review. Some Swj reviewer googled around and then looked up dirt on us.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.