The moment I hear "peer reviewed" I cringe. It's the kind of certification that only an outsider respects. No one who is involved with the process gives a damn.

In the past, my "peer reviewers" have insisted that I include ... well... not outright errors, but distortions which obfuscated the poor records of other research teams.

As a peer reviewer, I have let authors slide because I felt they had the right to be wrong. They were aware of the dissent -- they just didn't care. I knew that and chose to respect it.

As a editor, I have seen reviewers offer useful advice which was rejected by the author who fell into a snit -- with the result that another editor changed the reviewers so the authors fee-fees weren't hurt . Think about that for a while.