Time is scarce. We cannot read everything, so we make choices, in part based on the expected quality of various articles. We have a rough internal ranking of journals, that we revise based on our own past experiences reading articles in various journals, and maybe also based on the past experiences of other scholars whose judgment has proven sound. And if we don't have much experience with journals, and our trusted colleagues don't, we may put some weight on published rankings of journals. And when we do this, we are being rational, not "scandalous" or "corrupt." Maybe there's a better way to allocate scarce time. But what would be helpful would be less moral outrage, and more elaboration of a better way. Arthur M. Diamond, Jr.