@Vinnl 13d
It'd be interesting if you'd give arguments for why you think it's not a solution.

> As a consequence, they too have become a half-repository, but at least one with a certain entry barrier.

eLife will still have an entry barrier, but passing that barrier doesn't give you access to publication, but to a positive rating in the assessment of the significance and rigour. In other words, it will still perform the function of highlighting potentially relevant research, but it doesn't block non-highlighted research from being accessible.

@mattkrause 13d
I think that’s only PLoS One.

My experiences with PLoS Biology and PLoS Computational Biology have been great, but very similar to other journals.

@ttpphd 13d
The same people who made PLoS are the ones reforming eLife. Exact same.