As a follow-up comment, this is from their website (the journal that sent the solicitation, Research and Applications in Astronomy, doesn’t even list an editor-in-chief and there are no online issues; the ISSN are listed as TBD):
“All papers submitted to our journals go through a rigorous review process. They are refereed by experts in said field before publication. There exist four possible outcomes for each paper submitted and reviewed: acceptance, acceptance after minor revision, major revision and re-submission, or rejection. This prevents the promulgation of pseudoscience and insures intellectual and scientific integrity of the findings published by SEP.
The Editor-in-Chief is the first to see an author’s work. They are to forward the paper to experts in the specific field discussed in the paper for review. After review, the Editor-in-Chief of the journal will look over the reviewer’s comments. If two reviewers seem to hold opposite opinions of the same paper, the controversy will be resolved by the Editor-in-Chief. Ultimately, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. The final decision is being one of the aforementioned possibilities: acceptance, acceptance with noted changes, or rejection of paper.”
