I'll admit I started skimming after pg. 15, but this paper is mainly an argument for using "excellence" in academia (and particularly publishing articles). Whi

I'll admit I started skimming after pg. 15, but this paper is mainly an argument for using "excellence" in academia (and particularly publishing articles). While I don't disagree, the paper falls flat to me because: 1) Journals are usually judging by first "interest to the broader academic community" and then "technical accuracy" not "excellence". 2) There wasn't any new data presented. Citations to prior work, but even then it was just an argument of statements not fact.