Author here; you make a lot of good points! I should have phrased the context of this article more clearly: I am aware of the existence of these 'good' publishe

Author here; you make a lot of good points! I should have phrased the context of this article more clearly: I am aware of the existence of these 'good' publishers, and in machine learning (my main field), the publishing is mostly done via conferences anyway. My bad experiences stem mostly from established publishers such as Springer or Oxford University Press, who are often very important for certain application areas, such as as bioinformatics. The point about equations is very much true, though: _despite_ the fact of existing LaTeX templates, they take your paper and typeset it once again---often with detrimental results :-/ Concerning the peer reviewing: I fully agree! I myself am seeing reviewing as an honour and a duty to support my field. I am objecting to the reviewers/editors doing all this work and the publisher charging ludicrous prices to access a paper. Wiley still charges 42 USD for a PDF download and online only access of a paper I wrote 6 years ago! This is absolutely bonkers and not useful for people in countries/universities that are less well-off...