Channels contributed to:Behind the Paper
The quality of a review processes depends mostly on the competence of the reviewer/referee. Few competent people bother to find the time to be a reviewer. The net result is that the referee are often of limited experience of knowledge, which translate in reviews that are either too superficial/sloppy, or too picky on useless points. My best experience: writing the review for Nature Astronomy and having the editor contributing with his expertise to the draft.