[Taxacom] is this spam?

Thu Jul 23 09:14:40 CDT 2020

Hi Fred --

No not spam.  It is a real journal.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/ecological-indicators

I recently received a request to review an article at a different Elsevier
Journal and overlooked it and received this gentle admonishment email as a
result of my procrastination:

Dear  Beach,
I recently invited you to review the above referenced manuscript.
As you know, timely decisions are of utmost importance to authors.
Unfortunately, I must now proceed with evaluating this manuscript without
your input.
I hope we will have the privilege of using your services in the future.

Kind regards,

****** *******
Associate Editor
Ecological Informatics

I was in a snarky mood, so I wrote back:

As a helpful suggestion, here is what I would say if a potential reviewer
does not respond to a review request within three weeks.

1. I would use their full name in addressing them.  Or if you don't know
the first name or personally know the person, then the person's title would
be appropriate.  People call me Beach all the time, and I don't mind, but
when you are asking for someone for a favor, a customary greeting goes a
long way to soften an unsolicited review request.

2.  If after the first email appeal, I would not go directly to the nuclear
option and say, too bad you bum, you blew it, too late, we are withdrawing
our invite.  Everyone is leading distracted lives these days and
unsolicited email can scroll off the screen in a day or two and all too
easily be overlooked forever.  I can send screen shots of my inbox to prove
it, but I am sure you have a similar volume of email.

3. I don't know if your email message is using the passive-aggressive
tactic of hoping to get an apologetic plea from the target to let the
person review it in spite of missing your important deadline, it kind of
feels like that--hoping that out of guilt or shame for not responding the
person will now come crawling back to beg you for a chance to review it.
That gambit works with young kids or high-school dates, doesn't work
professionally with senior adults and grizzled academics.  To improve your
2nd chance response rate I would change that tactic to something more
positive and affirming.  Doing that would likely get a more positive
response and help you accomplish your goal.  A three-week deadline until
the nuclear shaming email seems short and unforgiving.   I appreciate how
difficult it must be as an Editor to get people to respond to review
requests, you have my understanding, but I am saving my guilt supply for
more heinous offenses.

4. I am not a provider of review "services."   Ending the letter with "I
hope we will have the privilege of using your services in the future." is
half-way there, but if you need SERVICES, try Google or a business
directory.  For academic reviews it would be more appropriate, and useful
for you, to change the final thought to something like:

I am sorry we did connect about reviewing this interesting and important
paper by your colleagues. It would have been very useful to have your
insight and evaluation on it.  We look forward to the possibility of having
your intellectual perspective on manuscripts of interest to you, and hope
you will consider future review opportunities.  Our community journal
depends on the thoughtful responses from people like you.

5. Thank you.

LOL.  Pretty snarky!

The U.S. journal editor responded that she did not write the email, it came
from the corporate office of Elsevier with her name and email address on
it.  Then, the corporate office of Elsevier wrote that they were sorry for
the tone of their terse 'thanks for nothing' email and that they would
strive to improve their language.  It looks like your email was a bit more
civil.

Jim

-------------------------------
James H. Beach
705 Mississippi Street
Lawrence, KS 66044
Home: 785-331-0421
Cell: 785-331-8508

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 6:52 PM Frederick W. Schueler via Taxacom <
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:

> ...I have no expertise in Primula or the Himalayas.
>
> fred.
> ====================================================
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Regarding the invitation to review manuscript ECOLIND-17223
> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 23:33:37 +0000
> From: eesserver at eesmail.elsevier.com
> Reply-To: ecological.indicators at uc.pt
> To: bckcdb at istar.ca
>
> *** Automated mail sent on behalf of Petina Lesley Pert, Ph.D, M.AppSci,
> B.Ed ***
>
> Ms. Ref. No.: ECOLIND-17223
> Title: DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF GENUS PRIMULA IN KASHMIR REGION: AN
> INDICATOR GENUS OF THE WESTERN HIMALAYAN MOUNTAIN WETLANDS AND GLACIAL
> FORELANDS
> Ecological Indicators
>
> Dear Dr. Fred W. Schueler,
>
> You were recently invited to review the above manuscript, by as yet we
> have not received your reply. Due to time restrictions we have decided
> to proceed with evaluating this manuscript without your input.
> I hope that you understand this decision. Thank you for your past
> efforts on behalf of the journal, and I hope that we may utilize your
> services as a reviewer again in the future.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Petina Lesley Pert, Ph.D, M.AppSci, B.Ed
> Associate Editor
> Ecological Indicators
>
>
> *********************************************
> For further assistance, please visit our customer support site at
> http://help.elsevier.com/app/answers/list/p/7923. Here you can search
> for solutions on a range of topics, find answers to frequently asked
> questions and learn more about EES via interactive tutorials. You will
> also find our 24/7 support contact details should you need any further
> assistance from one of our customer support representatives.
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>           Frederick W. Schueler & Aleta Karstad
>           Fragile Inheritance Natural History
> Mudpuppy Night in Oxford Mills - https://www.facebook.com/MudpuppyNight/
> 'Daily' Paintings - http://karstaddailypaintings.blogspot.com/
> 4&6 St-Lawrence Street Bishops Mills, RR#2 Oxford Station, Ontario K0G 1T0
>    on the Smiths Falls Limestone Plain  44.87156° N 75.70095° W
> (613)258-3107 <bckcdb at istar.ca> http://pinicola.ca/
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> after being distracted by our problems, and allowing that to let
> newsletters lapse, we've put out a newsletter enumerating our problems -
>
> http://clt1233162.bmetrack.com/c/v?e=10A91AD&c=12D10A&t=0&l=474DA01A&email=FCHN7XlcA3OvmUBGkdjfGg%3D%3D&fbclid=IwAR3J8aJMAR9iT3qB1N6xavNsMmSaeHslH6oG8jF9JYlOCHHG5TFXPYTjHdI
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
>