Often a submission is diverted to a scope query and editors are invited to visit a URL of the form https://joss.theoj.org/papers/XXXX to give comments. If an editor visits this link after a decision has already been made on the scope, then they are presented with the following error message:
You don't have the permissions to view this paper.
This is rather vague and possibly misleading – editors are likely to assume that they have mistyped (or mis-copy-pasted) the URL, or that they have forgotten to log in via GitHub/ORCID, or that their session has expired and they need to log in again.
A more helpful response from the system would be to indicate why the paper is no longer available. So for papers that have failed the scope query, the message could state that the paper has been removed for that reason. Alternatively, if the scope query comments are archived somewhere, perhaps the editor could be redirected to wherever that is. (I would actually prefer this latter solution, since sometimes I do want to go back and reread the comments I or others have made, particularly if I need to say something similar about another submission.)
Often a submission is diverted to a scope query and editors are invited to visit a URL of the form https://joss.theoj.org/papers/XXXX to give comments. If an editor visits this link after a decision has already been made on the scope, then they are presented with the following error message:
This is rather vague and possibly misleading – editors are likely to assume that they have mistyped (or mis-copy-pasted) the URL, or that they have forgotten to log in via GitHub/ORCID, or that their session has expired and they need to log in again.
A more helpful response from the system would be to indicate why the paper is no longer available. So for papers that have failed the scope query, the message could state that the paper has been removed for that reason. Alternatively, if the scope query comments are archived somewhere, perhaps the editor could be redirected to wherever that is. (I would actually prefer this latter solution, since sometimes I do want to go back and reread the comments I or others have made, particularly if I need to say something similar about another submission.)