Can anyone upload Table 13A. Seems to have disappeared from SSRN and NBER.
JFE - List of reviewers
-
to make it easier, can someone just post the names of the people that we should automatically reject from now on, because they never accepted anybody else's papers? I would say those with >20 papers and 0 acceptances.
Once this is done, I can also post a quick script to flag their papers on SSRN, and then also share a simple rejection letter template with generic rejection reasons. Thanks.
-
to make it easier, can someone just post the names of the people that we should automatically reject from now on, because they never accepted anybody else's papers? I would say those with >20 papers and 0 acceptances.
Once this is done, I can also post a quick script to flag their papers on SSRN, and then also share a simple rejection letter template with generic rejection reasons. Thanks.You're such a mean Chinese
-
Most of them are in the ECF area, which has plenty of bad papers. Just an alternative explanation.
Tarun Chordia - 61
David Larcker - 46
Harold Mulherin - 38
Jun Koo-Kang - 36
Joanna Wu - 34
Douglas Skinner - 32
Lauren Cohen - 32
Sunil Wahal - 30
Paul Irvine - 25
Sudheer Chava - 24
Jonathan Brogaard - 24
David Mayers - 24
Jeffry Netter - 24
Dong Lou - 23
Tor-Erik Bakke - 22
Yuhai Xuan - 21
David Musto - 21
Walter Torous - 20
Peter Wyscoki - 20
Christopher Polk - 20does not make any sense; these are the meanest people in our profession
Why don't they get kicked?
-
I think the real scandal here is not so much these folks’ acceptance or rejection rates (a relevant but tricky matter) but more the enormous concentration of power here.
WTH are these people to be so regularly tapped to decide what's good and bad?
I'm mean … looking at some of the names (e.g., Campello), I wouldn’t trust some of them to stir my coffee never mind make good independent judgements about research quality.