We shouldn’t take peer review as the ‘gold standard’

Article note: The publication process is largely garbage about profit-generation for parasitic publishers, and valueless prestige games for faculty. All peer review does is ensure it is cogently written, properly formatted, and doesn't offend the career interests of the entrenched players in an area. There is too much inertia, too much entrenched interest, and not enough agreement on alternative methods and metrics to kill it.