Discussion on answer by J. Fabian Meier: How to handle a paper by a reviewer who wants to be paid?

« first day (1 day earlier) next day → last day (16 days later) »

Steve

15:12

@Allure I refuted that point in a similar way. Why would he expect you to handle his work for free? Because that's how you told him it worked when you refused to pay him...

At this point you'd just be moving the goal posts on him for no reason.

5 hours later…

Allure

19:49

@Steve I don't understand what you mean. He submitted the paper to the journal, so he's expecting us to handle his work for free.

Steve

20:20

@Allure He did that because you told him it was free when you didn't pay him for his contribution...

If you decide that it's not free for him because he wanted to get paid then you're just discriminating against him by applying a special hidden rule to him.

Allure

20:50

@Steve please read the question again. We didn't tell him anything (other than he was invited to review a different contribution). He didn't review then, either, so he has not contributed anything.

If we charge him for his submission, it's not because of a hidden rule. It's because he's already expressed an opinion that reviewers should be paid, so we should pay reviewers for his submission. Since we don't have the budget to do so, he must be the one to provide the fee. Who else?

Steve

21:13

@All

@Allure Do you not see how that's an unfair decision based on your decision not to pay him when you asked to contribute. At best it's petty af.

"A reviewer declines to review a paper because he wants to be paid" why are you taking this to mean that all reviewers should be paid. Perhaps his opinion is worth more than others. I honestly don't understand why you think you're within your rights or even moral ground to discipline another adult.

Please read my previous responses again.

Their meaning amounts to you communicating to said individual that paper reviewers are not paid because you chose not to pay him for a contribution you wanted him to make. In this case, your actions have spoken for you.

Allure

21:34

@Steve do you have anything to say that hasn't already been said multiple times in the answers?

As for why I'm within our rights to discipline another adult: journals are private things. We're well within our rights to decline a submission for whatever reason catches our fancy. That can't even be called "discipline". We're just declining the submission.

And we have NEVER told him that reviewers are not paid because we chose not to pay him for a contribution we wanted him to make. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Steve

@Allure I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm telling you that YOUR ACTIONS COMMUNICATE FOR YOU.

Allure

@Steve and what are those actions? Starting a question on SE? I'm not going to respond to that ...

Steve

Wow

@Allure Not paying him to review.... Those are the actions.

I don't understand why this is hard to get

I'm really having trouble understanding why you would expect the person in question to want to review for free in the first place. I'm also having trouble understanding why you want to punish this person for not volunteering.

Legit you just wanted to make someone's life harder because they wouldn't give you free labor

that's pretty selfish

Honestly I'm having trouble understanding how you're in a position to decline his submission given that you don't understand the extremely minor consequences of your own actions.

I just don't get it. Someone shine some light on any of this

Allure

21:53

We never even got into a discussion with him whether we'll be paying him to review in the first place (read the question)

We expect the person to review for free because that's the standard in the community. We also expect that if he's not willing to review for free, he should also not be willing to expect others to review or handle his paper for free.

If we desk reject his paper we make his life harder by about as much as him making our lives harder - we simply invited another reviewer, and he can submit to another journal.

And don't complain about selfishness - by not reviewing others' paper but expecting others to review for him, that's pretty selfish also.

I'm in position to decline his submission because I'm the editor. I legit don't understand how that can be so difficult to understand.

« first day (1 day earlier) next day → last day (16 days later) »

all rooms