Latest review
First review round: 6.4 weeks. Overall rating: 3 (good).
Outcome: Accepted.
Motivation:
In general, it was a worth experience, except the time elapsed for the first decision. Furthermore, one of the reviewers, in my opinion, was incisive in excess, including irrelevant comments e.g. to use 2cm instead 20mm, eight instead 8, and so on. This kind of revisions don't contributed at all to improve the manuscript but difficulted the solutions of mistakes and delayed the publications of scientific results.
