Scope of the journal

Little by little we are witnessing a commercialization of the university and all related activities. The pressure to generate revenue is growing and in certain cases it reaches levels that are difficult to bear (http://www.dcscience.net/2014/12/01/publish-and-perish-at-imperial-college-london-the-death-of-stefan-grimm/). The generalization of practices leading to make authors pay directly for what they publish is, in my opinion, a threat.

Clearly there are editing costs that it is necessary for someone to support. However, making authors directly bear the costs of editing may/will, in my opinion, lead (i) to a loss of some valid authors' studies without the means to pay for their publication, and (ii) to a tendency for the companies that own the journals to maximize the number of published articles (not necessarily the best ones), to obtain more revenue.

Personnally I agree with the idea of a selection of the best papers per year,which can also be complemented by a few review papers on selected subject decided by the editorial team (typically they will ask some reknown colleague to write a state-of-the-art paper with still challenging and unsolved questions). OK for the fact that Epijournals are purely electronic but at some point I think they should be at least numbered in order to refer easily to them ?