提交人提交了一个论坛手稿，批评了六年在杂志上发表的文章。论坛稿件由三个审查人员审查了所有推荐的拒绝，并由副主任和高级编辑评估，他拒绝了审稿人的稿家被批评的令人难以置信，并认为它并没有真正推动主题。
提交人提出了决定，决定得到了维持，但提交人获悉，发表论文的不同批评，该批判在辩论中充分推进并以建设性的方式搬家向前移动主题。提交人通知我们，他们打算在在线提交给“开放同行审查期刊”之前，在线公开提供的稿件的版本和在线提交的稿件和评论。提交人要求期刊同意在CC许可下公布的审查评论。
We declined permission to publish the reviews and explained that the journal operates a confidential single blind review process. Reviewers are informed that their names will not be revealed to the authors unless they choose to sign their review at the end of their comments and are told that the manuscript and all correspondence relating to it should be treated as confidential. We do not currently allow reviewers to publish their own review comments for accepted manuscripts.
提交人要求了解期刊发布的指导，这对提交人提供了关于评论的机密待遇的具体机密性。We currently offer no such guidance to authors but we do link to our publisher’s guidelines on publication ethics on the submission site for the journal which states: “If discussions between an author, editor, and peer reviewer have taken place in confidence they should remain in confidence unless explicit consent has been given by all parties, or unless there are exceptional circumstances”.
鉴于期刊经营机密单一盲评论过程，本指南适用于审查的待遇。我们认为，这一职位与应对审查人员的道德准则一致，这使得他们应该“尊重同行评审的机密性，而不是透露稿件或其审查的任何细节。”bob官方app我们认识到，我们网站上的作者指南可能更明确，我们打算更新我bob官方app们的准则以提供更明确的清晰度。“期刊”的立场是，审查人员征求并提交的评论，作为机密审查进程的一部分，没有向审稿人提供通知，他们的审查评论可以发布。没有审稿人选择签署他们对此稿件的审查。
符合COPE讨论文件“谁拥有同行评审？”因此，我们认为不适合允许以任何形式发布的审查评论，因为在同意审查手稿之前没有通知审阅者潜在出版审查评论。作者不同意这种立场，并要求提出该问题以应对。
Question(s) for the COPE Forum
•杂志应该采取进一步行动，如果有的话，应该采取什么行动？
An update to the Forum was that the author has submitted a complaint to COPE directly. He is ready to go live with a public website, with a copy of his paper along with the reviews.
论坛同意，“期刊”在其目前的指导方针中行动。bob官方app但是，他们可以向教师表明他们会考虑未来文件的这个问题，但他们不能回到并回顾性地改变本文审查时的内容。因此，论坛一致认为，期刊已经完成了它，并且这里不需要进一步行动。一个建议是审查日志向作者和指示向审稿人提供指示，以确保有关出版评论的指导非常明确。
论坛讨论谁拥有th的更广泛的问题e peer reviews. Copyright is with the reviewer unless it is formally transferred to the author. However, if all parties consent (journal, author, reviewers) then the reviews can be made public. The Forum also discussed transferring reviewer reports to another journal when a manuscript has been rejected. Some journals advocate this but no names are attached to the review. The Forum warned against confusing open peer review and confidentiality.
在我们联系提交人关于COPE论坛讨论的结果时，提交人通知我们，他们决定在他们的个人网站上发布评论。我们通知审阅者和编辑涉及的案件，并通过我们同意，通过电子邮件向提醒提醒他们在未经我们的同意下进行的评论，但我们不打算进一步追求此事。我们现在考虑案件已关闭。