> And this is how we do science? How is that a good basis for scientific reality? The journal did not go out empty, and the paper did not cease to exist. The

> And this is how we do science? How is that a good basis for scientific reality? The journal did not go out empty, and the paper did not cease to exist. The incentives on academics reward them for publishing in exclusive journals, and the most exclusive journals - Nature, Science, Annals of Mathematics, The BMJ, Cell, The Lancet, JAMS and so on - only publish a limited number of pages in each issue. Partly because they have print editions, and partly because their limited size is why they're exclusive. A rejection from "Science" or "Nature" doesn't mean that your paper is wrong, or that it's fraudulent, or that it's trivial - it just means you're not in the 20 most important papers out of the 50,000 published this week. And yes, if instead of making one big splash you make two smaller splashes, you might well find neither splash is the biggest of the week.