The idea that a small number of reviewers can accurately quantify the importance of a paper as some number of "impact points," and the idea that a journal shoul

The idea that a small number of reviewers can accurately quantify the importance of a paper as some number of "impact points," and the idea that a journal should rely on this number and an arbitrary cut off point to decide publication, are both unreasonable ideas. The journal may have acted systematically, but the system is arbitrary and capricious. Thus, the journal did not act reasonably.