I reviewed a paper some time ago, and it recently got accepted after some rounds of revisions. After my first review I suggested several ways in which the paper could be improved. The editor agreed on the importance of the issues I raised and suggested r&r. Upon receiving the revision, I see that the authors thanked me ("an anonymous referee") in footnotes where they implemented the tests I proposed. They also thanked the other referee for some if their suggestions on other points.
After the paper is accepted, I read the final version of the draft and see that the authors simply removed the footnotes where they thanked referees for the suggestions. They don't even thank any referee in the acknowledgements of the papers! Worse, they thank an anonymous referee (me) for an almost irrelevant robustness test that I suggested at the very end of my report.
I obviously don't referee paper to get thanks in footnotes or credit. I actually wasn't expecting any thanks at all. But thanking referees during the review process and then acting as if the ideas came from them in the published version of the paper sounds like a stupid things to do. Don't these guys understand that this is not a one shot game? WTF??