Agree with all this. But, my point wasn't and isn't people declining to review, which is, of course, totally understandable. It's people simply ignoring requests, which bungs up the whole system -- a bad system, yes! -- when it only takes a few seconds to hit "decline".
November 24, 2025 at 5:49 PM
Agree with all this. But, my point wasn't and isn't people declining to review, which is, of course, totally understandable. It's people simply ignoring requests, which bungs up the whole system -- a bad system, yes! -- when it only takes a few seconds to hit "decline".
It takes a few seconds to decline. You don't do it, the editor (and author) have to wait 2 weeks. As I say, if you were the author, you'd be furious if 25 people simply ignored the invitation.
November 24, 2025 at 3:38 PM
It takes a few seconds to decline. You don't do it, the editor (and author) have to wait 2 weeks. As I say, if you were the author, you'd be furious if 25 people simply ignored the invitation.
My point wasn't and isn't about declining.
It was about not responding at all, which _is_ selfish. (People should try putting themselves in the author's shoes for a moment. They wouldn't appreciate the weeks of extra delay, me thinks, when the shoe is on the other foot.)
It was about not responding at all, which _is_ selfish. (People should try putting themselves in the author's shoes for a moment. They wouldn't appreciate the weeks of extra delay, me thinks, when the shoe is on the other foot.)
November 24, 2025 at 3:03 PM
My point wasn't and isn't about declining.
It was about not responding at all, which _is_ selfish. (People should try putting themselves in the author's shoes for a moment. They wouldn't appreciate the weeks of extra delay, me thinks, when the shoe is on the other foot.)
It was about not responding at all, which _is_ selfish. (People should try putting themselves in the author's shoes for a moment. They wouldn't appreciate the weeks of extra delay, me thinks, when the shoe is on the other foot.)