So, suggesting that I am not a native English speaker was your way of not being an asshole. Your immense ego is obviously so big that you cannot see what you are doing. If I had any doubts about calling you a simpleton, they were just renewed by your statement about me being the first strike.

Incidentally, I am well aware how journals work---OA or otherwise. So, don't presume to lecture me about how they work. I've been doing this for a very long time (PhD in 1984). After working at various labs I have had scores of my papers reviewed and published and I have reviewed countless papers (both in-house and at the behest of various journals---and some were OA journals). So, cut the damn crap about how I don't know about journals and publishers.

Sure, journals are expensive. I know this first hand as my group spends thousands and thousands of dollars to publish articles and to access them every year.

Open access is a failed experiment. It's not sustainable. If you want to change my mind, let's see what's happes in 10 years.

In the meantime, I am not going to seek out low IF journals for my works or the works of my team.

Sure, it's my "insane bias". I can see how "They charge a couple thousand dollars for sticking a couple megabyte PDF on the web" could be misconstrued. (By the way, that was sarcasm. I don't want you to be confused by reading above your level.)

When you read aloud (as I am sure it is the only way you can comprehend the written words) do you even listen to yourself? The bias is clearly the only thing occupying the volume between your ears.

I'm sorry. Are you not used to reading English text above a 1st grade comprehension level?

A $60k car should at least have a walnut veneer. On a $250k car there is no excuse for not having acacia koa wood, and for $2.5M and up not having solid ebony and gold-plated stainless straps.

What kind of a simpleton are you that you only seem to value research papers on a $/megabyte basis?

Really? So, what part of insufficient numbers of people published articles in these journals so they folded don't you understand? Most OA Journals have shamefully low Impact Factors and charging the authors to publish puts the whole idea of a worthwhile journal back-to-front. Sure everyone, including myself, likes not having to pay for access to journal articles. But putting the burden to maintain everything solely on the backs of new article authors sounds a lot like a Ponzi scheme. "Hippie" "It's all free, man" OA Journals may make some feel good, but it's just the wrong way to go about doing journals.

How much was invested in maintaining the Alexandria library? The Musaeum (which ran the library) was a well-funded institution until Egypt's decline. Cut off their funding and the library withered away until (with a little help from the Christians and Muslims) the Alexandria and Serapeum libraries were all gone. What would you expect these "hippie" open-access journals to do when they cannot keep their lights on for a few years?

It would be interesting to see what each of these journal's impact factors were. I would be surprised if the combined IF would as high as some journals are now.

Citation?

Sure, they save on rent, but lose money on lost productivity.

You only know one person who thinks the CDC data is made up? I'm in the Philadelphia burbs and I know dozens of people who say this. Several claim that COVID-19 is a complete fabrication, and one person (a chiropractor) thinks its a "plandemic" but isn't worried because she can cure diseases. I wish I only knew one person who was batshit crazy, but I live near a lot of Republicans.

Anal tone? Is that the sequel to Dialtone?

Just imagine inexpensive drives that serve up ads when you need to get to your data.

The author should be asking "Is There a Future for Firefox".

Ok, then. Why do regular "windows" Thinkpads all work well with Ubuntu? Are you going to claim that their relationship with Microsoft contributed to this?