Dear Prof. H.,
Thank you for your submission to the august Journal of Universal Rejection.
We paged through your document in a semi-interested sort of way until we got to Table 1.1. At that point we were shocked that, although the other three quadrants had entries, there was nothing in the quadrant [Consistent concepts/differentiable concepts]. We weren't reading closely enough to know what this meant, but it seemed too bad to have that box be empty. Maybe you should make up a theory that fits in that box. Or maybe you have and that is what your paper is about? If so, put "this paper" in that box. Or maybe you prove that the box must be empty, in which case you should put "this paper proves that this box is empty" inside of the box. That way if there is someone (like this Editor) who really only wants to focus on the Tables, they won't be left in the dark. Oooo, or you could put "This space intentionally left blank," like they do on those standardized exams (though if you ask me the whole thing seems a little self-defeating, like the sign on the glass entryway of a building here which reads PLEASE DO NOT POST SIGNS ON BERGLUND HALL EXCEPT ON BULLETIN BOARDS LOCATED ON THE GROUND AND FIRST FLOORS. THANK YOU).
We have decided that although it seemed pretty impressive, we cannot accept your paper for publication. Try to not take it too hard.
Caleb Emmons, PhD
Journal of Universal Rejection