Re:Fictional peer reviews rejecting famous papers (2005)
by tjgq on Wednesday September 26, 2012 @01:14PM
(#4576732)
On the topic of self-contradicting reviews, I once got one where the reviewer began by noting that "the paper is very difficult to read and almost impossible to understand" and proceeded to remark that "it contains very interesting ideas"...
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Fictional peer reviews rejecting famous papers (2005)
by shawabawa3 on Wednesday September 26, 2012 @01:22PM
(#4576784)
I fail to see the contradiction. Being difficult to read and impossible to understand does mean it can't contain interesting ideas.
Re:Fictional peer reviews rejecting famous papers (2005)
by tjgq on Wednesday September 26, 2012 @05:10PM
(#4578066)
At the very least, (s)he would have had to understand the main ideas to deem them interesting (though perhaps the details were difficult to follow). So yes, you're right that it isn't technically a contradiction. The way it was written did come across to me as intelectually dishonest at the time, though.
Re:Fictional peer reviews rejecting famous papers (2005)
by shawabawa3 on Wednesday September 26, 2012 @01:22PM
(#4576783)
I fail to see the contradiction. Begin difficult to read and impossible to understand does mean it can't contain interesting ideas.