The joy of writing critiques about the editorial process is doubly enhanced when engaged in debates such as this one wherein I find the most fascinating views, points, and counterpoints in correspondence to my own. I am simply pleased to say that the sterling colleagues who have chosen to respond to and rejoin my initial essays are highly skilled and insightful editors in their own right, and we all benefit from the colloquy that ensues in such discussions about how to improve peer reviews in our field of science.
"Rejoined and Regenerated: Response to Responses to “Reviews, Reviewers, and Reviewing: The ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ in the Scientific Publication Process”,"
Communications of the Association for Information Systems: Vol. 42
, Article 30.
Available at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol42/iss1/30