@johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org @nasamuffin@jorts.horse Johannes, I agree with most, but not all of what you wrote. My perspective is different. I am a mostly retired academic cardiologist who authored or co-authored >400 peer-reviewed papers and sat on several editorial boards. I have never seen an editor decide to publish a paper because of money (but yes, sometimes if a paper is sensationalistic). I have little faith in preprints and have seen the conclusions of some studies toned down or changed drastically after peer review and "real" publication. Post-publication peer-review might work for basic science better than it does for clinical medicine. I would rather trust vetted reviewers than some guy off the street with an axe to grind. Having said that, I agree that Elsevier and the other big publishing houses are a rip-off.