Timeline for Should I post a response to reviewers online?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 2014 at 5:45 | comment | added | 299792458 | @NateEldredge - But I must add that some of them, like Physical Review Letters, do allow for supplemental material (where there isn't any such restriction). So, people can move big derivations etc. over there, and have only the important steps in the 5 page text. But of course, all of them don't, which is why some papers are cryptic. | |
| Aug 28, 2014 at 5:42 | comment | added | 299792458 | @NateEldredge - I'm not saying that mine (Physics) doesn't have pedagogic papers, but it is a mixed bag - some pedagogic and some totally cryptic. However, cryptic and concise aren't really synonyms (to me at least). And conciseness is appreciated in letters (page restrictions etc.) and even otherwise. | |
| Aug 28, 2014 at 5:38 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | Yeah, okay. In my field (math) it's not unusual to write with a more pedagogical tone, where you really try to help the reader follow the argument, and point out possible pitfalls. Also, we rarely have strict page limits (and if one journal does, you can usually find an equally good journal that doesn't). | |
| Aug 28, 2014 at 5:30 | comment | added | 299792458 | @NateEldredge - (contd.) So, while proving consistency is a very important requirement in such situations, it isn't that in a subsequent presentation, you include this consistency argument. The way it goes is - I've shown that there is an overall consistency, now believe rest of what I say! Thus, while consistency is important, that's not the subject you are addressing. But, of course, you may be right, maybe it could be field-dependent. Nevertheless, thanks :) | |
| Aug 28, 2014 at 5:25 | comment | added | 299792458 | @NateEldredge - You are right, that could be an option. But like I'd said in the answer, it will mostly be off-track from the theme of the paper. Also, if the paper is something like a letter communication, where there is a word or page-restriction, you can't go on and on. The way I'm imagining this question being posed is the way it goes in PhD qualifying oral exams - you describe, e.g. how your devised plan is going to work, and there is a big prof on the other side of the table who stumps you with a plain ''But this is inconsistent with ... How can this be right?'' remark. | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 21:36 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | Well, I don't know the details, and this could be culture/field dependent, but in such a case I'd be tempted to say something in the paper anyway. "The reader may be concerned that our result appears to conflict with [sacred tenet] because of [referee's reasons]. However, this is not the case, because of [brief sketch of why the conflict doesn't really exist]." If the referee had this concern, surely other readers might as well? | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 6:27 | history | answered | 299792458 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |