With no editors and with the immediate publication of submissions, isn’t Philica just going to fill up with junk articles?
This is an important question, but who is to say what is junk and what is not? Traditional journals inevitably reflect the biases of a handful of editors and reviewers. This means that if your paper doesn’t match their theoretical or methodological outlook, it won’t be printed; differences of opinion, however genuine and fair, are very rarely tolerated in the traditional publishing route. Editors and reviewers wield altogether too much power over what gets into the literature (and we say this advisedly, having done both roles ourselves).
