Yes. It's an abuse. And the process of getting tenure depends on department politics. Over not very long time at all the department is a tight little club allowing only like minds in. These like minds are the "peers" in peer-reviewed papers/journals and the reason I scoff at the idea that peer-review means shit.
The main value in peer-review (especially if it's blind) is that scientists are vain and genuinely don't want someone else to publish something if they can stop it.
Peer-review today keeps a great amount of monstrous SJW propaganda from being published, as much of it as we already get, there would be even more without peer-review.
But SJW's have been complaining about peer-review for years, so I'd expect it to be destroyed any day now.
Yes. It's an abuse. And the process of getting tenure depends on department politics. Over not very long time at all the department is a tight little club allowing only like minds in. These like minds are the "peers" in peer-reviewed papers/journals and the reason I scoff at the idea that peer-review means shit.
The main value in peer-review (especially if it's blind) is that scientists are vain and genuinely don't want someone else to publish something if they can stop it.
Peer-review today keeps a great amount of monstrous SJW propaganda from being published, as much of it as we already get, there would be even more without peer-review.
But SJW's have been complaining about peer-review for years, so I'd expect it to be destroyed any day now.