![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bronwynrhWe won! We won!
Er. . . Ouch.
But we won, and that's what's important!!
My first manuscript was accepted by Molecular Microbiology yesterday! I just found out this morning, and I'm reading the reviewers' comments now.
Hence, the ouch. All three reviewers slaughtered our sacrificial lambs, just as we expected them to do, and all three picked up on the same conundrum we faced when trying to work up our model. Apparently they are confused and we still need to flesh out our explanation a little more. We expected that. That's ok. We don't know who our first reviewer is, but he clearly missed the boat on several important points, and came out looking like a dink on most of his other comments. Reviewer 2 is Stephen S., an expert on FNR regulators (no, we're not supposed to know, but sometimes it's easy to figure out). He provided a constructive review that I'm finding quite helpful, even though he's not up on his biofilms. Our third reviewer is Steve F., long-time rival of my own beloved P.I., snark-meister extraordinaire (again, it was easy to figure this one out). Boy, was he in rare form. I will grant that he picked up on one mistake that we would have been embarrassed to let slip through; but, on the rest. . . he is so far out in left field, he's not even playing baseball anymore. He knows nothing at all about biofilms, nothing at all about FNR regulators (which, by the way, shouldn't matter if you know how to read scientific literature properly), and is suggesting all sorts of things that clearly indicate his sloppy reading of our manuscript. Basically, he came out looking like a snippity ass.
Clay told me that I needed to sit down with the reviews and a punching bag :-) Read them with a careful but critical eye, always remembering that it's all good because it was accepted. He says it's always this way. You never get all-glowing reviews back, because somebody has to have a bee up his butt, or piss on his Cheerios. So you grin, bear it, say "thank you, sir! May I have another?" And move on.
So, we'll take our big ol' manuscript, revise it, cut it, alter it. . . give in to as many demands as we can tolerate, then send it in for publication.
My first first authorship, babies! YEAH!
Eventualeeee
Er. . . Ouch.
But we won, and that's what's important!!
My first manuscript was accepted by Molecular Microbiology yesterday! I just found out this morning, and I'm reading the reviewers' comments now.
Hence, the ouch. All three reviewers slaughtered our sacrificial lambs, just as we expected them to do, and all three picked up on the same conundrum we faced when trying to work up our model. Apparently they are confused and we still need to flesh out our explanation a little more. We expected that. That's ok. We don't know who our first reviewer is, but he clearly missed the boat on several important points, and came out looking like a dink on most of his other comments. Reviewer 2 is Stephen S., an expert on FNR regulators (no, we're not supposed to know, but sometimes it's easy to figure out). He provided a constructive review that I'm finding quite helpful, even though he's not up on his biofilms. Our third reviewer is Steve F., long-time rival of my own beloved P.I., snark-meister extraordinaire (again, it was easy to figure this one out). Boy, was he in rare form. I will grant that he picked up on one mistake that we would have been embarrassed to let slip through; but, on the rest. . . he is so far out in left field, he's not even playing baseball anymore. He knows nothing at all about biofilms, nothing at all about FNR regulators (which, by the way, shouldn't matter if you know how to read scientific literature properly), and is suggesting all sorts of things that clearly indicate his sloppy reading of our manuscript. Basically, he came out looking like a snippity ass.
Clay told me that I needed to sit down with the reviews and a punching bag :-) Read them with a careful but critical eye, always remembering that it's all good because it was accepted. He says it's always this way. You never get all-glowing reviews back, because somebody has to have a bee up his butt, or piss on his Cheerios. So you grin, bear it, say "thank you, sir! May I have another?" And move on.
So, we'll take our big ol' manuscript, revise it, cut it, alter it. . . give in to as many demands as we can tolerate, then send it in for publication.
My first first authorship, babies! YEAH!
Eventualeeee
