No comment desk rejections are the worst rejections. We're really good at creating Gods...
How much did you pay for that submission? Stop patronizing club journals, they're predatory by nature.
No comment desk rejections
-
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorI recently received a desk rejection from Econometrica from a very famous economist. I personally would prefer there was no comment. What was written strongly indicates that the editor a) spent less than a minute on the paper and b) has no idea about the field. The paper was eventually published in a decent journal.
Referee resources are scarce. The fact that the paper was published at a "decent journal" strongly suggests it was not good enough for Econometrica and the editor made the right call.
I have been desk-rejected by Econometrica before. Happens to everyone, and no need to take it personally. Just be realistic about the quality of your work.My point was different. If a very famous editor is saying 2+2=5, I would rather prefer him deskrejecting and saying nothing.
-
I see your point. I still would like them to say something. Sometimes even a very brief comment helps to improve the paper. If you belong to the club, getting good feedback shouldn't be an issue. But If you don't, it is.
No comment desk-rejections will make economics more clubbier than ever.
Yeah, OP, better to get a comment from editor, but they are generally very brief and really do not tell you much beyond that they are not interested in further considering your paper either because it is wrong field or not all that interesting or something like that. This is not something to get too worked up about, and indeed, a lot better than waiting a year and a half for a rejection after three rounds of revision, which most certainly happens, even if it should not.
A Longtime EditorI recently received a desk rejection from Econometrica from a very famous economist. I personally would prefer there was no comment. What was written strongly indicates that the editor a) spent less than a minute on the paper and b) has no idea about the field. The paper was eventually published in a decent journal.
Referee resources are scarce. The fact that the paper was published at a "decent journal" strongly suggests it was not good enough for Econometrica and the editor made the right call.
I have been desk-rejected by Econometrica before. Happens to everyone, and no need to take it personally. Just be realistic about the quality of your work.My point was different. If a very famous editor is saying 2+2=5, I would rather prefer him deskrejecting and saying nothing.