- critical feedback on papers
- hypermonetization (and deleterious siloing) of works often produced with government grants, leading to primarily academics only having ready access to papers, whom don’t see the subscription costs as a burden to them.
- disseminating only papers meeting a threshold to maintain quality of the journal
Maybe scientists and academics should seek to create and use equivalent quality peer / committee adversalism but publish in open forum that operates based on donations.
Academia seems currently over-commercialised: industry getting cheap labor, undergrads going into debt and journals, law libraries and textbook companies making a killing by locking up knowledge behind a paywall. Research papers and case law should be available to the most people as possible for little or no cost.