2 Minor grammar/typo fixes. Minor punctuation changes; mostly adding commas.
source | link

The first thing to do is, whatwhich I understand you have done, is to check all comments to see whether or not something is unclear or can be misunderstood. Your experience with the second reviewers matches what I see as an editor, that (very) short reviews often are sub-par, and essentially of very little use (applies to both positive and negative reviews). So this is unfortunately not unique.

What I think you should do is the following. Follow up the first reviewer's comments as carefully as you see fit. When you turn over to the comments of the second author, try to treat them seriously as well. If you are lucky, maybe something you fixed in response to reviewer 1 will cover Reviewer 2's comments. If not, you need to try to respond to the comments even if you think they are pointless. failingFailing to respond, or trying to brush them off (regardless of how much you would like to do so), should be avoided. The example yoyou gave should be possible to counter by simply saying that the abstract is not the place to expand on any discussion, since a detailed discussion is provided in the paper proper. Although this may seem unnecessary, you do not know how the editor interpretswill interpret the comments and your reply, so try to be clear and stay neutral.

The first thing to do is, what I understand you have done, check all comments to see whether or not something is unclear or can be misunderstood. Your experience with the second reviewers matches what I see as an editor, that (very) short often are sub-par and essentially of very little use (applies to both positive and negative reviews). So this is unfortunately not unique.

What I think you should do is the following. Follow up the first reviewer's comments as carefully as you see fit. When you turn over to the comments of the second author, try to treat them seriously as well. If you are lucky, maybe something you fixed in response to reviewer 1 will cover Reviewer 2's comments. If not you need to try to respond to the comments even if you think they are pointless. failing to respond or trying to brush them off (regardless of how much you would like to do so) should be avoided. The example yo gave should be possible to counter by simply saying that the abstract is not the place to expand on any discussion since a detailed discussion is provided in the paper proper. Although this may seem unnecessary you do not know how the editor interprets the comments and your reply so try to be clear and stay neutral.

The first thing to do, which I understand you have done, is to check all comments to see whether or not something is unclear or can be misunderstood. Your experience with the second reviewers matches what I see as an editor, that (very) short reviews often are sub-par, and essentially of very little use (applies to both positive and negative reviews). So this is unfortunately not unique.

What I think you should do is the following. Follow up the first reviewer's comments as carefully as you see fit. When you turn to the comments of the second author, try to treat them seriously as well. If you are lucky, maybe something you fixed in response to reviewer 1 will cover Reviewer 2's comments. If not, you need to try to respond to the comments even if you think they are pointless. Failing to respond, or trying to brush them off (regardless of how much you would like to do so), should be avoided. The example you gave should be possible to counter by simply saying that the abstract is not the place to expand on any discussion, since a detailed discussion is provided in the paper proper. Although this may seem unnecessary, you do not know how the editor will interpret the comments and your reply, so try to be clear and stay neutral.

1
source | link

The first thing to do is, what I understand you have done, check all comments to see whether or not something is unclear or can be misunderstood. Your experience with the second reviewers matches what I see as an editor, that (very) short often are sub-par and essentially of very little use (applies to both positive and negative reviews). So this is unfortunately not unique.

What I think you should do is the following. Follow up the first reviewer's comments as carefully as you see fit. When you turn over to the comments of the second author, try to treat them seriously as well. If you are lucky, maybe something you fixed in response to reviewer 1 will cover Reviewer 2's comments. If not you need to try to respond to the comments even if you think they are pointless. failing to respond or trying to brush them off (regardless of how much you would like to do so) should be avoided. The example yo gave should be possible to counter by simply saying that the abstract is not the place to expand on any discussion since a detailed discussion is provided in the paper proper. Although this may seem unnecessary you do not know how the editor interprets the comments and your reply so try to be clear and stay neutral.