Assuming you want to get rid of the fees entirely: people will have to look at the spam and divide it into more and less spammy. Others will have to do the sam

Assuming you want to get rid of the fees entirely: people will have to look at the spam and divide it into more and less spammy. Others will have to do the same with the less spammy and so on. Eventually there is room for more accomplished moderators Until those with the greatest prestige filter down to a tiny sub set. You assign weights to the experts so that with each level of review the good half raises in rank much more than the previous round. At first you do it by committee but eventually the rating for each scientists can be derived from the importance of their publication(s). I don't think it needs to be free or even cheap. Subscriptions to the archives (and research data) could be more expensive and the money can be divided over the reputation points. Free access can be earned by the sweat of your brow, publish worthy papers and do reviews that closely match other reviewers. Universities should be able to publish enough quality material to get paid. Have the grownups pay for juniors education again. It was a good idea back then it is a good idea now.