It's too slow. The first review took 3 months, and they gave me revision suggestions. One reviewer was difficult to deal with, while the other had a positive attitude. I wrote a 43-page revision. After sending it back for revision, the second review took another 3 months to provide feedback, and only after I pushed for it. One reviewer agreed to accept it, but the other insisted on his own viewpoint. I explained that his method was not suitable for my data and purpose, but he still disagreed and asked me to make changes. After the second revision, he still rejected it. 

This whole process took me a year. The editor changed in the middle, which led to the second editor not understanding my article at all. He listened to the one-sided words of the other reviewer and rejected me. 

Furthermore, before rejecting it, there was a delay of a month due to system issues. I submitted through the system, but it was returned a week later. I contacted the help center but couldn't resolve it. It was only after contacting the editor that I could resubmit. This back-and-forth happened four times. 

The entire cycle took a year!

(0) 讚！ | 简单

I have published two papers in it and I feel it's pretty good. It can be considered a relatively stable journal.

(1) 讚！ | MML2021

The processing speed is acceptable. I met two anonymous peers, Comments of one reviewer was obvious unreasonable, and he kept the tone of arrogance. After a serious reply, the editor accepted it without second revision. It took two months for review, but it took one month for pending decisions. It was the same twice, and it was useless to ask by email.

(1) 讚！ | Men