A while ago we (Erik, Theo, Patrick, and myself) finished a paper titled Typing and transformational effects in complex information supply as part of my PhD project. We submitted it to a journal, whose name I won’t mention here, and after waiting 8 months we received a reject. We were a little surprised, as the comments of the reviewers didn’t seem that bad at all! Either way, we updated the paper and submitted it again, this time to the International Journal of Co-operative Information Systems and this time around it got accepted! yay! 
It is always nice to get such good news…
This time around the reviews were very positive. Frankly, so positive that it amazed me, especially since the paper had been rejected elsewhere already. Below are parts of the comments that I found especially pleasing:
Very well written paper. The material follows a logical flow from the previous work by the authors.
[...]
Although quite abstract, this kind of work is nevertheless valuable for systems and tools to build upon.
This reviewer actually took the time to read some of our older papers, as well as studied the details of the formalism present in the present paper. Impressive.
I have carefully read most of the theoretical presentation. Authors have investigated thoroughly all aspects of information transformation and the presentation is excellent. I hope authors would not mind if I differ on some points.
[...]
After this remark follow some comments of technical nature. Again I was impressed with the level of detail of this review. It doesn’t happen very offten that both reviews of a paper are so in depth and to the point (and thus: of high quality and very useful for the others). I have no idea who the reviewers are (blind reviewing prevails in academia), unfortunately, for else I could give them two thumbs up!