The first round of reviews was productive and up to standard. The second round of reviews was a failure in all respects. Only a single reviewer provided a report and in that report 4 comments were included, three of which had to do with very minor typos/editorial changes. There was a single comment requesting similar changes to what was already done after the first round of reviews. The Associate Editor then took the decision to reject the paper based on this single (not very critical) review.