In keeping with our intent to be transparent in all of our processes, submission rejections will be made openly. If a creator believes that we have wrongly rejected their submission, we ask that they submit an appeal letter to the editor, and that they do this openly as well. If we agree, after reading the appeal letter, that the appeal is warranted we may then invite the creator to submit a revised version of their article, which we will re-enter into our review and reflection process.
We ask that the creator include as much detail as possible in the appeal letter.
Please respond, point-by-point, to the comments provided by the journal’s reflectors and facilitators.
Appeals that clarify the intent of the submission and offer to revise specific portions tend to succeed more often than appeals against editorial decisions where we did not think Murmurations was the right journal for the submission. If a creator can explain and justify clearly in their appeal letter the work's importance, relevance, and usefulness to Murmurations’ readers, it may be worth submitting an appeal.
An invitation to submit a revised version after an appeal is not a guarantee of acceptance: the article will be sent through the open review and reflection process once again and might still be rejected at any stage.
Finally, we can consider only one appeal per manuscript, so we ask that the creator spend as much time and effort on writing the appeal letter as they think necessary to clearly state their case. Typically, prolonged negotiation over rejected submissions is an unsatisfactory experience for both creators (authors) and facilitators (editors), so we keep the process to one appeal.
(Note - the language above is modeled after the appeals language of The BMJ, a weekly peer-reviewed medical journal. http://authors.bmj.com/post-submission-journey/peer-review-process/ )