Read on Twitter
. @Atmosphere_MDPI is choosing speed over quality - a thread about why I suggest not to publish, review, etc for them (beyond @MDPIOpenAccess President& #39;s stance on #BlackLivesMatter 
https://abs.twimg.com/hashflags... draggable="false" alt="">). In May, I received a review request with a 10-day response time...
When I was partially through my review, I requested an extension, which was granted on a Friday - until Sunday. I cared about the authors and manuscript and spent my weekend on it. I sent the following note to the editorial staff: "In the future, I urge you to please have...
"...some leniency in review deadlines, as other journals are doing, given the circumstances of the current global pandemic. It does not seem appropriate to rush the review process and cause undue stress on reviewers at this time." The reply I received stated:
"The review period is too short...when you provide extremely detailed comments during COVID-19 epidemic situation. However, as a Open Access Publisher, we are
told that our goal is becoming the fasted publisher." I replied: "It appears that the goal of..."
told that our goal is becoming the fasted publisher." I replied: "It appears that the goal of..."
..."becoming the fastest publisher" is coming at the expense of manuscript quality by not allowing sufficient time for thorough reviews." I received the request to review the revised manuscript with a 3 DAY turn-around. When I immediately request more time,...
...I was told that NO longer than 1 WEEK would be allowed for review time. @Atmosphere_MDPI is valuing speed over quality. This is a detriment to good science and publishing.
