The other interesting aspect of the request for advice is the assumption that being an editor endows one with near perfection as an investigator/author. Although it is intuitive that someone immersed in the evaluation of research should be knowledgeable about the subject, critiquing an investigation is different from conceiving and performing it. Just as people follow the advice of stock brokers who are often unsuccessful at selecting profitable stocks for themselves, so too the experience of evaluating papers does not necessarily translate into infallibility in producing them. In fact, I have had and continue to have papers rejected for publication, and I know the same is true of other editors. Nevertheless, the current JACC editors have now processed over 20,000 submissions, and over time patterns have emerged and a number of characteristics, both good and bad, have been repeatedly observed and catalogued.