There is an interesting discussion over at PEA Soup about when (if at all) to request a re-read. The discussion thread leads to an interesting discussion of a more general problem concerning the blind referee process.

There have been quite a few posts in the blogosphere highlighting problems with the peer review process in philosophy journals.

I wish there was more accountability in the journal referee process, but editing and refereeing seems to be such a thank-less job that it's difficult to see how to proceed.