In fact, this is not necessarily the case. If the reviewers don't have strong rejection language, then I think they can still contribute to the journal after revision. That's what I did. One of my articles was rejected a while ago. The reviewer put forward the suggestion of overhaul and minor supplement, but did not directly say that the manuscript was rejected, and finally the editor rejected it.

I didn't care that much. After I revised it according to the reviewers' opinions, I wrote down my revised place in the cover letter, which is the journal I re-submitted, and asked the previous reviewers to review it. Even funnier, my cover letter was written by the editor who handled my article last time, while another editor was handling it. I was worried and refused to do it. In addition, his name was not written on the cover letter, but the editor was still very good and sent it to me for review without paying attention. Of course, I don't know if it was given to the previous judges. Reprinted for reference only.