[CuriousCosmic]

Honestly I think it's a good system at it's core, it just needs some adjustment on incentives (mainly that reviewers need to actually be fairly compensated for their time).

The way I see it, journals are more or less independent reviewing orgs. That a paper has been peer-reviewed means nothing. It's all in the reputation of the reviewer and what they said.

Personally I'd actually like to see journals publish their reviews including rejections because I think it's way more important to know why something was or wasn't accepted than that it was.

[2cynykyl]

Publishing a record of rejections and reasons is a very interesting idea! I will be adding that to my "deserves more thought" pile!