I think, you're completely missing the point. The question is NOT whether the paper merits the publication. That should be decided by the experts who review the

I think, you're completely missing the point. The question is NOT whether the paper merits the publication. That should be decided by the experts who review the paper for the journal. For that matter, the opinion of someone working on holomorphic curves about a probabilistic model in biology is interesting, but completely irrelevant. According to Hill, the editor of Math Intelligencer was bullied to withdraw the offer to publish the paper. That's unacceptable regardless the status of the journal. Regarding NYJM and fast track, first, the journal positions itself as a place for "rapid publication", second in a comment to Gower's post, Rivin claims that they obtained two positive reports for the paper. Since this clearly contradicts your story, can you elaborate in which sense the paper bypassed the procedures that are standard for NYJM?