>Authors, publish your papers in your personal webpage. Do not promote paywalls. This plea to authors to change their behavior ignores why they submit papers

>Authors, publish your papers in your personal webpage. Do not promote paywalls. This plea to authors to change their behavior ignores why they submit papers to paywall publishers: The prestigious journal's acceptance of their paper helps promote their career. Academic publishing is not a web host server for pdf files type of problem. Therefore, suggesting authors to upload their pdf to a public Dropbox url, GoogleDrive, Github repo, or their university faculty homepage doesn't solve the real problem. So even if Scihub had a "direct upload pdf" option, that still doesn't solve the underlying problem for getting their paper recognized for good work which spurs citations. Scihub is a distribution mechanism for pdfs but not a recognition and impact filter for which papers are _important_. This is why scientists keep doing contradictory behaviors: On the one hand, they praise Scihub because it gives them access to papers -- but on the other hand, they keep submitting to paywalled journals to help their career. Think of game theory incentives instead of hosting pdf files. Journals have the respected editorial staffs to look at their submitted paper and forward it to other peers for review. OpenAccess is a possible option but most OA journals don't have same prestige as the paywalled journals. That may change but it will take a long time.