Advanced Optical Materials

I submitted a review article, which is generally more difficult than a research paper. This time, I blindly submitted without writing a cover letter. The review process was relatively fast, with a total of three reviewers. The feedback provided was very professional, specific, and even sharp. I am very grateful for the reviewers' suggestions as they allowed me to view and improve my work from different perspectives. After major and minor revisions, it took more than two months, which I consider to be relatively fast. I think the quality of this journal's articles is quite good, and the research reports are done diligently, giving a solid feeling.

Additionally, I want to mention that I couldn't find the endnote output style for AOM on their official website. I had to manually edit the reference format based on my observation. I don't know if the official website will provide it in the future. It's a bit troublesome to handle this.

Only the speed is satisfactory.
One reviewer rejected, one accepted, and the editor gave the rejection.
In response to the shameless reasons of the reviewers, we appealed and the editor agreed to reconsider. (Key point)
Then in the second review, it was still rejected, with the exact same reasons as the first time. (Key point)
I just don't understand, why did they agree to reconsider our submission in the first place?? It wasted a month of time.
We can accept being rejected, but what we don't understand is the extremely shameless reasons for rejection and the waste of time.
The reason behind all this is that the reviewers are simply not familiar with this field, and the editor's choice of reviewers is highly problematic.
I suggest submitting to well-established journals. This kind of experience can be extremely frustrating.