Ugh, both of these stories are awful for your postdoc and so so frustrating. How can we have such high demands for productivity and at the same time let things languish in purgatory for so long?

Even if we are just particularly unlucky, the system isn't working, especially for ECRs

The entire thing is so baffling, the 1st review was so minor we were able to reply within 48 hours with a <4 page response.

It feels so unfair that my student may get a brand new review +130 days after submission for a journal that boasts an average time to decision of 33 days...👀

The real questis is how long we will need to wait to find out if the reviewer is a 👻 or a 🧟!

These sorts of delays really suck for EC people, especially students that are close to graduation and looking for their next gig.

Why ghost a first review request and then accept the request to review a revision?

Why request someone who ghosted the review in the first place to review again? 😵‍💫

@topoismyforte.bsky.social you'll love this one

@cuahsi.bsky.social @csdms.bsky.social @ciroh.bsky.social @earthsciencewomen.bsky.social @agu-h3s.bsky.social @aguepsp.bsky.social

🫠🫠🫠🫠🫠 Ugh I'm sorry. It's so frustrating, especially with student authors where a timely turnaround is extra important.

I've gotten about 5 in the last three weeks. Meanwhile, one of our submitted papers has been without an editor for over a month 🫠

Thanks, Nicole!

Thanks, Brian!

Stay tuned for the formal advertisements of these opportunities!

Huge news! Congrats!

Ah yeah, I saw that! The disturbance session I submitted to also ended up getting merged with a management session (and scheduled for the last day 😕 )

Noooo I was looking forward to this session!

🥳🥳🥳

😍