Until we are able to fairly assess the quality of our own work without the need of surrogates like journals' prestige, we won't be able to fix the way peer recognition and faculty hiring/promotion is managed and we remain stuck in this loop.

I think a big change in mentality by researchers and faculty would also be needed to stop all this. I have often the feeling that we are incapable of judging the merit of literature if it doesn't come with a rubber stamp of an IF or similar.

I guess having funders to directly pay the society to support their publishing branch would in the end be the same as giving money to researchers to pay APCs but with the advantage of having a much bigger negotiating power, is that what you are suggesting?

Very interesting, what's your take on non-profit publishers charging APCs for OA? Is that justified?

I knew you'd say that 😆

Now we want to know the answer

🤤

Loosely quoting a synthetic coordination chemist friend of mine: Same ingredients, tools and recipe in the hands of a michelene star chef or a random person will lead to very different results