Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
It is with some regret that the Editor avoids exclamation marks
finding them "unnecessary at the end of a startling sentence and
embarrassing at the end of one that is not startling".
The exclamation mark is a valid punctuation mark, perhaps as much so
as the question mark. Is this the next symbol to be rejected by the BMJ(?)
This unjustly maligned symbol has many uses other than that stated,
such as to draw attention to an obvious misteak(!) and in road warning
signs. Surely "ice" does not have the same impact as "ICE!!!!". Italics
similarly draw attention to a word or phrase whether they be in latin,
francais (italics)or otherwise.
Does the editor desire lower case letters, then the abolition of
comas full stops and ultimately sentences merging into
onecontinuousstringofletters
Perhaps sentences should speak for themselves, but then speech itself
is more interesting when it has emphases.
In defence of the exclamation mark
It is with some regret that the Editor avoids exclamation marks
finding them "unnecessary at the end of a startling sentence and
embarrassing at the end of one that is not startling".
The exclamation mark is a valid punctuation mark, perhaps as much so
as the question mark. Is this the next symbol to be rejected by the BMJ(?)
This unjustly maligned symbol has many uses other than that stated,
such as to draw attention to an obvious misteak(!) and in road warning
signs. Surely "ice" does not have the same impact as "ICE!!!!". Italics
similarly draw attention to a word or phrase whether they be in latin,
francais (italics)or otherwise.
Does the editor desire lower case letters, then the abolition of
comas full stops and ultimately sentences merging into
onecontinuousstringofletters
Perhaps sentences should speak for themselves, but then speech itself
is more interesting when it has emphases.
So I say keep the exclamation mark !
Competing interests: No competing interests