-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

The editor was very respectful and the review comments were somewhat helpful. The report was clearly fairly positive and read like an R&R. Editors rejected in virtue of the comments not being a "strong" enough positive recommendation and without even sending to a second referee. It also seems to me that a journal *this* determined to reject viable papers for reasons of space, even ignoring what was probably an R&R recommendation, should desk reject more often so as to reduce wait times and allow themselves more space to respect referee reports. Not recommended for those up against any kind of deadline.

-

-

-

-

-

The referee raised entirely new objections, some of which miss crucial and explicit parts of the paper’s argument. The initial comments provided were relatively succinct and easy to address. I had to wait over four months for this second verdict which seems to ignore the fact that I addressed all the initial comments.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-