diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | appeal.tex | 18 |
1 files changed, 8 insertions, 10 deletions
@@ -38,18 +38,16 @@ \opening{To the editors of Physical Review,} -We wish to appeal your decision on our manuscript LZ16835, \emph{Complex -complex landscapes}, which received a single referee report. +We wish to appeal your decision on our manuscript \emph{Complex complex +landscapes}, which received a single referee report. +We believe that the referee's overall criticisms of our paper are not entirely +justified (and above all, difficult to answer). We have, however, submitted a +revised manuscript clarifying the specific aspects that the referee found trying. -We believe that the criticisms that the referee addresses to our paper are -not entirely justified (and above all, difficult to answer). We have, however, -clarified as much as possible the parts that the referee found trying. - -The referee is particularly worried that we have cited articles that are not -themselves sufficiently cited, so we thought that it may be useful at this -point to propose a set of referees that are beyond suspicion of incompetence or -uncitedness: +The referee seems particularly worried that we have cited articles that are not +themselves sufficiently cited, so we thought it may be useful propose a set of +referees that are beyond suspicion of incompetence or uncitedness: \begin{tabular}{ll} G Ben Arous & Courant \\ |