Publish or perish: the perils of peer review (like democracy: a seriously deficient process, but it's the best we have...or is it?)
Oh well, at times like this I turn to Nietzsche:
(was ihn nicht umbringt, macht ihn stärker)
What does not kill him, makes him stronger.
Or, perhaps, an inverse Gore Vidal moment:
Whenever a friend succeeds, a little something in me dies.
Jackie Leven:
Eternal is the warrior who finds beauty in his wounds
Arthur Koestler:
The more original a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterward
Howard H. Aiken has summarised perfectly:
Don’t worry about people stealing your ideas.
If it’s original, you’ll have to ram it down their throats
Review |
What were the reviewers
thinking?
Notice how the reviews are often logical complements of each other, and therefore mutually incompatible. Perhaps one criticizes the lack of mathematical detail, then another the profusion of mathematical detail. |
 |
Both reviewers are agreed; my algorithm works in practice, but not in (their) theory. |
 |
Reviewer 1 likes it.
Reviewer 2 knows how to kill a short letter by asking for so much more than can be encapsulated in the format. |
 |
Chronicle of a rejection foretold |