Man, am I glad JSTOR uses that sweet sweet $25 per article to improve their service.
Academic journals are less trustworthy when they have a low barrier of Entry.
In order to have a high barrier of Entry it needs to have a rigorous screening process.
People are less likely to trust the rigor of the screening process if it is low budget.
A high-budget screening process needs to be funded somehow. The Government can fund this process but then we get into issues of potential pro government bias in science.
Human culture has dictated that only expensive things can be trusted to have quality. JSTOR is the result
>>8346365
Journals don't pay the people that review them you know that right?
>>8346371
You don't need to use the money FOR anything. You just need to have the money involved someway to give the impression of quality.
Most people informed enough to understand the nuance usually is employed by a research university or equivalent anyways so they will not personally have to shoulder the cost
>>8345304
It's called sci-hub
>>8346389
Bullshit, compare elsevier's extortionate prices with the AMS prices. And the AMS publishes some of the most respected journals in the field.
>>8345304
>Is there a sustainable model that could replace the Academic Jew?
The current model is pretty much on a 'need to know' basis already. If you ain't working at the cutting edge of academia or involved in some way why do you really give a shit about something you in no way understand at all?
Go to university and mooch off their subscriptions - problem solved.
>>8347946
>Go to university and mooch off their subscriptions - problem solved.
And the universities must be getting their money from thin air, right?. Academic publishing has become a scam, it needs reform.
>>8345304
I doubt anybody uses the per article or per issue payment stuff, either your university has access to it all, or you mail the author