This post might be more useful if it offered more specific alternatives, rather than mostly criticizing the academic process. Imagine the same ideas reworded as suggestions for improving the process. Then the posts here could discuss the new ideas (useful!), rather than debating the criticism (tedious!).
Perhaps peer review should be done in public, as a page-rank style rating according to the authority of each reviewer in that domain. Would it be completely open, single blind? double blind? Good questions. But it might reduce delays and decrease the effect of politics on the process.
Perhaps peer review should be done in public, as a page-rank style rating according to the authority of each reviewer in that domain. Would it be completely open, single blind? double blind? Good questions. But it might reduce delays and decrease the effect of politics on the process.