Motivation: The length of the review process was painfully slow. In the second round of reviews, I only received a review from one of the two reviewers and the entire review was 3 sentences long and one of the sentences complimented our improvements from the first round of edits. We were able to address these comments quickly, and it took another five months almost before the manuscript was accepted after these minor edits.

Motivation: The review of the first revision took almost a year, and I tried to inquire with the journal via website links and by looking up editor contact information with a web search (their contact info was not included on the website) multiple times during this time. Most of my inquiries received no response, and the one response I received was to a query I had sent over 3 months prior and the response was that the article was still in review. The review for the 2nd revision took several months, and again I sent an inquiry that was not responded to inquiring of the status of our paper.