Good point. Maybe it could be a per publisher transaction system to give a broader coverage of fields.

I try to decline fast, except when it's a MDPI or similar predatory publisher. Then I just sabotage the whole thing. (Unless it's Agronomy or Remote Sensing)

When charity is compensated it ceases to be charitable and loses its moral qualities. There is reams of literature on this from the study of care.

Trying to fix the commercialisation of academia by commoditising peer review is like trying to cure termites with a controlled house fire.

How about reciprocal review credits? In order to submit a manuscript you would need to provide 5-6 good reviews? Avoids gaming the system and rewards peer review.

Eritoten, kun se lehmä voi tuottaa parissa vuodessa toisen lehmän.

Mutta oli siinä infran ja tuottavan pääoman suhde aika hyvä. 850 mk lehmä 100 mk navetassa.

Maybe somebody should ask Grok about who's the best at rigging elections.

Siinä on se haaste nyt tässä päivityksessä, että kaksi isoa kaupunkia puuttuu, eli se aggregoitu ei ole mitenkään järkevä. Katsotaan, mikä trendi on kohta. Ruotsissa tultu jo alas huipusta.

If bigger is better,then massive children do removals (CDR) would be better... "Kids, get massive, urges IPCC"