On Thursday, 17 November 2016 at 15:26:21 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Regardless of the outcome, I just want to commend whoever wrote the rejection text* on doing such a clear and comprehensive job. I'm sure it must be disappointing for a DIP author to have it rejected, but detailed, constructive criticism like this would - for me at least - make the experience worthwhile and encourage further contributions of higher quality.

* I see dicebot committed, but I'm presuming Walter &| Andrei had a lot of input and I think i detect recent exposure to the academic review process...

The text was sent to me by Andrei, though I presume Walter did take part in making the decision :)

Hopefully such high quality and detailed feedback will provide a much more clear picture about expectations from DIP content and overall chances for various kinds of proposals to be approved.

Reply via email to