[Doctor Stochastic]

I can tell you that peer review is not a problem as to content of scientific papers. I have been a reviewer and a reviewee. The main purpose is to catch gross errors (like 2+2=5) and typos and to just see if an article is fit for a particular journal. I have sometimes that an article would be better served in other journals than the one I'm reviewing for; this is generally to get a wider audience for the paper.

The only whining I've seen about peer-review suggests to me that it works. There's lots of nut-cases who submit papers on things like the "Aliens who Kidnapped Kennedy from the Grassy Knoll" and stuff. Peer review weeds out this type of stuff.

If you have a suggestion to improve the system, by all means make it.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post!

One suggestion comes to mind, that there be a publication for rejected articles upon the author's approval - giving the article as written and the letter(s) of rejection and being made available to the general public.