[Skaven]

The conclusion is just a rant, it doesn't pick up on the any of the points. I personally think in the current form, the paper is very weak and should be reworked.

Especially the methodology is very convoluted. The method should be clearer, significant increases should be shown from the data first. Next a model should be given, then the significant increases can be explained as only coming from the rally.

Trajectory is calculated from 10 weeks before the event. Model isn't given only as increment of cases. I would expect a fit to some exponential function.

If I would do this with an exponential curve, at a later time the increment would just be bigger. Increase after rally should be even higher than previous estimate anyway.

It would also help to give the data used in the paper in some simple graphs.

This is only my opinion after a brief skim, I could have missed some stuff.