1 entomologist ("retired")
Overall the editing process/reviewing system is very good. I like it. The various authors are at different stages: some beginners or relative beginners, some 'journeymen,' and some very experienced with a good record of good published papers. Yet all authors need and appreciate helpful suggestions/comments on ways of improving the MS because one person can't (always) think of everything. That is why the system is so good, with two referees and Editor/Associate Editor looking at things, sometimes from slightly different angles, all leading to improvements. If only authors would pay the same meticulous attention to detail in the preparation of the MS as they do to the study of the insects. That is the outcome we are all trying to encourage. That is how the process works, right?