[jhbadger]

Because in most fields, preprints count for nothing. Not for priority, and certainly not for tenure decisions and the like. In fields like biology and chemistry an actual journal article is required (at least at present; there are attempts at preprint sites for biology at least but only enthusiasts use them at present). And publishing in a journal costs money one way or another. Either you expect your audience to have a journal subscription (which can cost tens of thousands of dollars per year meaning that only large universities may subscribe), or you have to pay the costs of publishing your article yourself so that it is available for free. Neither are great options, but for most non-physics/math fields, those are the options.

[Vinnl]

Note that Plan S also states that the funders aim to push for academics to be recognised for the value of their research, not the name of the journal it was published in. Wellcome explicitly added to its requirements [1] that organisations they fund must also sign the San Fransisco Declaration on Research Assessment, meaning that they should commit to this.

(Disclaimer: I work on a project that also has this goal.)

[1] https://wellcome.ac.uk/news/wellcome-updating-its-open-acces...

[tinus_hn]

Note that this money goes to the journal editors; the major effort in publishing is reviewing which is a volunteer job.

[mattkrause]

Not very editors are well-paid either. Most of this money goes to publishing companies.

[ModernMech]

I don't consider reviewing to be volunteer work, like say, running an after school club at the local middle school to teach kids how to program. I wouldn't list reviewing under the "service" section of my CV, but rather the "professional development" section. The reason being is that as an academic, I expect and require someone to step up and review my work when it comes time to publish it. If I don't want to pay for that work, then I better be willing to do it for free when someone asks me. You see, I'm getting something in return, so I don't think reviewing a paper is a very selfless thing to do.

[chrisseaton]

> reviewing which is a volunteer job

No it's one of your paid professional responsibilities as part of your job, if you work in academic or industrial research, which is almost all reviewers.

[tinus_hn]

Is that paid for by the journal out of the publishing fee?

[chrisseaton]

No it's not. That doesn't make it 'volunteer' work for the researcher. You can count it as part of the fee the institution pays to the journal if you want, and I can understand not liking it, but it's not volunteer work.

[bainsfather]

When I was a referee (physics), it was most definitely not considered part of my job. I did it entirely voluntarily, was not paid for it, and no-one at my institution cared whether I chose to do it or not.

[ModernMech]

> and no-one at my institution cared whether I chose to do it or not

Are you speaking as a grad student, or faculty? Because if you don't review, sit on an organizing committee, or otherwise participate in the academic process in your field, you're not going to make it very far in your career. Our disciplines are smaller than you think, and people take notice, especially in your own department. Are you sure you don't have a reputation?