Wednesday, October 27, 2010

JACS rejections just got tougher

Man, this new drive for getting manuscripts reviewed quicker is brutal!

(Parody of this rejection slip.)
Posted by at
Labels:

11 comments:

  1. J-boneOctober 27, 2010 at 8:25 AM

    I wonder how many people will get #12 (you'll know who the blog junkies are if they do).

    ReplyDelete
  2. ChemjobberOctober 27, 2010 at 8:28 AM

    Do you remember that picture with the flames in the background on Tenderbutton? Loved it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JohnOctober 27, 2010 at 11:21 AM

    I like #5, even though I don't like the fact that they can state #5.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousOctober 27, 2010 at 1:41 PM

    You forgot "I just don't feel like sending it to reviewers". Maybe that's the same as #9?

    ReplyDelete
  5. milkshakeOctober 27, 2010 at 2:06 PM

    we got a rather funny acceptance letter for our medchem paper - if all reviewers demands are met. The reviewer demands that optical rotation data is provided for optically pure final compounds and intermediates... He wants hi-res MS also.
    Its in Med Chem Comm, of all places.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousOctober 27, 2010 at 10:52 PM

    #17: I despise the primary author. We are engaged in an endless war of rejecting each other's papers.

    #18: Not enough organocataylsis.

    #19: Not enough click chemistry.

    #20: My slaves, uh, I mean "group" is synthesizing the same natural product. I can't bear to be upstaged by some two-bit professor at a public university who has a better strategy anyways and ultimately will get the last laugh because a Big Pharma company will license the method to install the essential sidechain on a naturally replenishable precursor to the target molecule. ALL WILL LOVE ME AND DESPAIR!!! (Of course, I'm not naming anyone in particular.)

    ReplyDelete
  7. J-boneOctober 28, 2010 at 8:13 AM

    CJ, I missed the Tenderbutton write-up. I saw Kyle F's, and he had some choice words for Prof. Sames and how he handled the situation.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ChemjobberOctober 28, 2010 at 8:40 AM

    J, go to archive.tenderbutton.com and type in the login/password. (tender/button)

    Go to the March 8, 2006 post. It's not as epic as I remember, but it's still quite something.

    ReplyDelete
  9. J-boneOctober 28, 2010 at 9:58 AM

    Thanks A LOT for that. I just wasted my morning reading about biologists being lazy and the ensuing hilarious commentary about being a mayor of some twigs.

    ReplyDelete
  10. AnonymousNovember 1, 2010 at 10:48 PM

    @J-bone and CJ: This list is funny even if you aren't a regular at the old blog watercooler....I think several of these (5, 12, 16) have now been woven enough into the lore tapestry of grad school that most folks will get the joke.

    @ANON 7:52: #21 - Figures mislabeled as Schemes, Schemes as Equations, Equations as Graphs, etc...

    #22 - Don't put NMR data in your manuscript, you dick, that's what the SI is for!

    #23 - You're from a group that regularly publishes in Synlett, and even you can't duplicate your own work

    #24 - Did you just fold together a bunch of unrelated experiments so you could publish something before you defended?

    ReplyDelete
  11. AnonymousNovember 1, 2010 at 11:06 PM

    #25 - You KNOW this is more of a JOC...we're not a screening service, you know!

    ReplyDelete

looks like Blogger doesn't work with anonymous comments from Chrome browsers at the moment - works in Microsoft Edge, or from Chrome with a Blogger account - sorry! CJ 3/21/20

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)