背景：本人分析化学专业博三搬砖狗一枚半年前投稿ac，一个审稿人很满意，另一个完全不相信我的结果，要求拒稿，主编给了大修；补了大量实验证明我的结果可靠性，修回后，第二个审稿人依然不接受我的结果（而他并没有充分的证据证明我是错的），因此拒稿。

正文：9月底改投aca，一个月后拒稿。拒稿理由让人瞠目结舌，我把邮件原文复制过来：

i regret to have to inform you that your manuscript is not suitable for publication in aca. this decision has been reached in light of the comments made by the referees. the detailed remarks are appended below.
please do not try to resubmit your paper to aca, unless you have been invited to do so by the editor, as it will be withdrawn from ees.
thank you for your interest in analytica chimica acta.
yours sincerely,

analytica chimica acta
e-mail: aca@elsevier.com

comment from the editor

dear authors,

one of the reviewers invited for your manuscript informed me that he had already reviewed this manuscript when it had been submitted to analytical chemistry.
obviously, the manuscript had been rejected by analytical chemistry.
analytica chimica acta maintains the same high scientific standards as analytical chemistry. therefore, i am sorry to say that i do not feel able to accept the manuscript for publication.

    这位审稿人是当时审稿ac的那个（我承认我命背），他告诉编辑我的这篇文章被他审过。
    大家看看，编辑说了什么：由于被ac拒了就要被aca拒，因为aca与ac有着相同高的科学标准。
    呵呵，这是一个严谨的、科学的、公正的、“high scientific standards”的科研杂志该给出的拒稿理由吗？更何况，在重新投稿之前，我还做了很多的补充实验，希望使我的文章更科学。而aca根本不会给我们这样的年轻科研工作者一个接受改正和提高的机会。
    这样一个心胸狭隘的杂志，显然将ac看成了假想敌。话说回来，圈里的人都知道ac的地位，哪是aca能比得上的，aca只是近年在提高影响因子方面做了手脚罢了（有点跑题）。
    这位编辑还说了“please do not try to resubmit your paper to aca, unless you have been invited to do so by the editor”这是警告？威胁？还是担心东窗事发？
    这位编辑没有给出自己的姓名，是他知道这样会被举报吗？还是aca本身就是这样一个不负责任的杂志？
    不知道各位虫友有没有遇到过类似的经历。 返回小木虫查看更多