I submitted a paper to a journal in the computer science field, After waiting quite a bit. The 'major revision' decision letter came after the editor received six reviews, However, the reviews were not all sent to me.
Six reviews is so unlikely but the flow of the reports are as follow:
reviewer 1: Accept with major revision suggesting that the paper is an excellent paper and only the results section could be improved
reviewer 2: Reject stating that there is no novelty in the paper and it would only be good for a conference
reviewer 3: Accept stating that the paper contains multiple contributions
reviewer 4: Accept after major revision stating only the results section should be improved and adding some references which after I checked was all of the same author (clear enough what was in his mind)
reviewer 6: Accept stating that the paper was well presented and organized
reviewer 5: was not included (perhaps an accept or a reject)
Well after reading carefully the comments (mostly about the results section which I already knew needed some work), I added carefully what reviewers 1 and 4 asked for with details and included a point to point answer to different comments along in the revision.
While I answered reviewer 1 and 4 comments, I did not mention anything about reviewer 2 who already had no comments.
Do you believe I should have gave a comment on reviewer 2 ?
The status of the revision went in 4 hours after I submitted it went straight to 'under review', do you believe it would have been sent to the reviewers 1 and 4 directly?
Based on the reports I mentioned, the fact that I mostly answered the comments of reviewers 1 and 4 with care and that all reviewers did not criticize any particular aspect of the paper other that wanting some (small ) real examples to be added, do you believe there is a strong chance for acceptance in my case?
Thanks in advance