Yup. Can be very frustrating.

Yikes.

Really great piece. It’s just so upsetting.

This paper was a labor of love and the outflow of a failed grant submission a number of years ago.

It may also be the nerdiest/most esoteric paper I've put out there.

Hopefully one of you enjoys it.

In the paper, I really do two things:
(1) I retool Differential Rent 1 and 2 to try and make them analytically useful concepts.
(2) I trace the contours of each rent category across our two main surface water doctrines in the United States.

The book, which I hope will be out sometime in 2025, has taken a lot of my time and attention over the past couple of years. I am very happy UNC Press and @lucaschurch.bsky.social believe in it, and will be helping me put it out into the world.

If you want to be a copy editor, go do that. But that’s not what this is.

And also stop being so rude, don’t call people’s writing “awkward” or say a table is “very unprofessionally formatted” (looked fine to me).

If you’ve done this recently… looking at you!

Great position to be in! I mean, I’ve never recommended any place to reject a paper due to the number of tables. If the journal allows it, why not?

My issue is that many journals limit the number of “elements” you can include.

Ah. Yeah that’s tough. Can you make one table to summarize the replications?

I recently had an editor make me add in like legit 5 tables from the appendix to the paper before sending it out.

Reviewer comment? “Far too many tables”