We have that. People don't use it. PLOS e.g. specifically stated multiple times that they'll publish what meets their quality standards regardless of a positiv

We have that. People don't use it. PLOS e.g. specifically stated multiple times that they'll publish what meets their quality standards regardless of a positive or negative outcome. The problem is: Even if you publish failed research it won't get cited as much. And people still use citation metrics to evaluate "quality" of science. Just having journals that publish your "failed" research is a good start, but it's not changing the incentive structure.