Oh jeez, ita. But good luck with the job!

I would also like -t's salad.

These both made me laugh:

"What gives this away that it was a meth lab is the fact it's a meth lab," said Provo Police Sgt. Brandon Post.

Not sure how this made it through proofreading, peer review, and copyediting.

Opinions on whether this is worth the price? [link]

Well my experience in a peer reviewed journal after acceptance included:

1) Accusations of self-plagiarism. It took an exchange of about 20 emails, and copying in a senior editor to get the Jr editor making the accusation to read the article I was accused of self-plagiarizing and admit that the article submitted was not self-plageriarizing the already published article.

2) Page proofs sent to me for final review (on a Friday afternoon by the way with a Monday morning deadline) giving the wrong title for the journal I was to be published in.

This may be a hint of how errors can get through the peer review and copy editing process.

I'm not ready to admit shirts from the 80s are vintage clothing.

Page proofs sent to me for final review (on a Friday afternoon by the way with a Monday morning deadline)

Our turnaround time is 48 hours for proofs. Not 48 hours of a M-F work week; 48 hours. We assume that authors may have to review their article in their down time. We have tight deadlines.

Accusations of self-plagiarism. It took an exchange of about 20 emails, and copying in a senior editor to get the Jr editor making the accusation to read the article I was accused of self-plagiarizing and admit that the article submitted was not self-plageriarizing the already published article.

Did they use the word "plagiarism"? I'm just curious, because we have a policy that an author cannot publish material with us that's been previously published elsewhere. That's not plagiarism, obviously, but we still won't publish something that's been previously published. And it doesn't have to be 100% the entire article; it just has to be a majority of the article/data.

(Of course, if they actually thought it was plagiarism, that's just nonsensical.)

Opinions on whether this is worth the price?

39" sleeve? Wow, DH is good with a 36" sleeve. That is really long. Other than that I have no clue on what is a good price. Seems pricey to me.

Actually publishing an article that has been published elsewhere (even by yourself) without disclosure is self-plagerism. [link]

She did use the word self-plagerism, but we are talking the same thing - recycling your old work while claiming orginality. And the point is, as she admitted, I had not done this - it was not just a matter of the words being different - they were completely different articles. So what made her think otherwise? I can speculate, but I don't know for sure. Since she had not read the published article, she must have been taking somebody's word. And even after I protested, she was going to continue to take someobody's word. It took intervention from a Senior editor to get her to even read the article that was supposed to overlap with the one they had accepted. I mean if you are told that an author has done this and they deny it, isn't the next step to actually read the article you are told overlaps? Why would it take your bosses intervention to get you to do that.

In terms of 48 calendar hours being usual turnaround. Well great but I had no notice of which 48 hours. Making those 48 hours run over a weekend - zero week day time allowed is not a good practice, even if it is standard practice. What if I had been out of town that weekend? I guess I would hot have had to opportunity to review the page proofs? I would think that if you are given such a narrow turnaround time you would also be given advance notice of when you will receive them. Or, if exact time is not know, maybe an "expect them in the next 14 days" - maybe with notice, that yes, your 2 days turnaround time can start at 9 PM on a Friday night.

Also, getting the journal title wrong is at minimum an indication that the copy-editor involved is being overworked. Maybe it is the way it has to be done. But it certainly strikes me as a process that allows errors to creep in.

Actually publishing an article that has been published elsewhere (even by yourself) without disclosure is self-plagerism.

I stand corrected. We don't refer to it by that term, and I'm not going to be the one to tell the AMA they're doing it wrong by not using that term. But okay, then, self-plagiarism. We still don't allow it.

But I agree with you that if that came up as an issue, then someone should have read the article in question to see if there was repeated data.

In terms of 48 calendar hours being usual turnaround. Well great but I had no notice of which 48 hours. Making those 48 hours run over a weekend - zero week day time allowed is not a good practice, even if it is standard practice. What if I had been out of town that weekend? I guess I would hot have had to opportunity to review the page proofs?

We let our authors know we have a tight turnaround time, and if they can't review their proofs, a co-author will need to review them. When an author's paper is accepted for publication, they're informed in writing that because we have very tight turnaround time, they're going to get proofs with a 48-hour deadline.

I'm sympathetic to a busy schedule, absolutely. But choosing to publish does mean agreeing to work within a publisher's schedule (which should be delineated when a paper is accepted for publication).

Also, getting the journal title wrong is at minimum an indication that the copy-editor involved is being overworked.

We publish 10 journals (and 11 in January). Sometimes mistakes happen. It's too bad it happened to you, but I'm still going to say that someone using the wrong journal title isn't evidence of anything other than human error. I edit 3-4 articles at a time, and I am responsible for communicating with the authors. If I'm editing an article for the Dermatology journal, the Internal Medicine Journal, and the Ophthalmology journal, and I'm rushing, I might accidentally send and email to the author of the Dermatology article and refer to JAMA Ophthalmology. I double-check everything I send, but mistakes still happen.

I'm sorry it was such a bad experience for you.

Tomorrow is my last day of partial hospitalization. I'm so relieved. I think my brain is healing, though the state of my gardens might suggest otherwise. I'm off for another two weeks so I'm gonna crash here with you guys for awhile if it's ok.

And you're gonna show off your house to me and we'll compare oh fuck DIY moments!