Submission on 23.08.10.
Revision on 23.11.13. The normal review process should be fast. After three months of no response, an email was sent to urge the review, only to find out that the editor had resigned and no one was handling the manuscript. After the reminder, the decision was made in 5 days, with major revisions required. There were two reviewers, one was very meticulous and raised 4 major issues, each followed by two to five minor issues. The second reviewer directly stated that the manuscript was not suitable for publication, blaming the lack of clarity in addressing the problems.
Resubmission on 23.11.29.
Minor revisions on 24.01.16. Both reviewers were very detailed, raising 14 minor issues. Thank you.
Resubmission on 24.02.06.
Acceptance on 24.03.01, no issues.

(0) 讚！ | jessie