If
the referee likes a paper, it usually gets accepted.
Not exact matches
We would
like to thank the staff of the C.D. Howe Institute and two anonymous
referees for their comments on an earlier draft of this
paper.
The authors would
like to thank the
referee for valuable comments that helped to improve the quality of the
paper.
Your thoughtful comments are greatly appreciated, John, especially since they're more likely to look
like the sort of
referee reports one might expect for such a
paper (if Climate Etc. doesn't talk me out of writing it) than much of what I've been hearing here.
It looks
like Jim D is coming to the same conclusion about the
paper's basic premise that Dan Rosenfeld did when he
refereed the
paper more than three years ago, see Appendix 5, pages S12436 - 7, of the October 2009 Interactive Comment.