Journal editor here. I'd like to clear up a common misconception about the review process. Editors often choose reviewers whom we know have a conflict of interest. In many cases, the person best qualified to review a paper is a frequent collaborator of the author, or on the other hand, someone whose work the author is criticizing. We do not disclose such conflicts in our correspondence with authors. To do so would violate the confidentiality of the review process. However, we do consider conflicts in our own assessment of reviews. We are not idiots. If someone the author is criticizing writes a very negative review, we understand the potential bias and the need to carefully assess the strength of the reviewer's arguments. After considering the analysis provided by the reviewers along with our own judgment, we contact the author's undergraduate degree-granting institution to request a transcript, and we accept the paper if and only if he received at least an A- in real analysis.