One useful function of this forum might be discussion of author's
rights. Then, somewhere down the line someone might be prepared to draft
a Charter of Author's Rights which individual authors could refer to when
having problems with an editor. By the same taken, perhaps there should
be a Charter of Editor's Rights.
I present here one obvious, and one not-so-obvious, item for consider-
1. Judgements concerning the acceptance, reviewing and publication of a
paper should be concerned with the characteristics of the paper itself
and not with the race, sex, creed or colour of the author.
[One can recall that a century ago, female authors had to adopt a
male pseudonym to ensure fair evaluation (e.g. George Eliot).
2. A letter from an editor to an author stating that a paper has been
accepted (without qualification), means that the journal is irrevocably
committed to publishing the paper without undue delay.
[Several years ago I had a firm letter of acceptance from an Editor.
Subsequently the editorship was changed and the the new editor declined
to honour the previous editor's commitments.]
Do these two statements seem appropriate for inclusion in a Charter?