In my opinion, online publishing has added many advantages to publishing science, including rapid research dissimination, permanenet depository, and easier access. On the other hand, being easy allowed many predatory and low quality publishers to appear. So the solution to this problem is not by totally ignoring online journals but by handling the resulting problems by increasing the researchers' awareness about predatpry publishers and establishing high quality criteria for journals to be considered legitimate and enforcing these criteria.

I agree with the aforementioned view.

Online journals have assisted greatly in disseminating the research papers of researchers with the widest form of visibility. Yet, due to predatory online journals, we all need to be cautious, think, verify the journal for credibility before submitting our quality research to them. It is disheartening that many of these predatory journals use grandiose statements to mislead amateur researchers who are excited to publish their researchers! I think a uniform criteria of quality standards in publication must be enforced by an agency (that handles academic affairs) to flush out these inhumane online journals in every country!

I cannot but agree with Dickson on this, that on the one hand online journals provide the researcher with a wider audience and on the other the are many journals that just want money and have little interest in quality. But that goes for a number of other publications. Poetry, which on some online sites is of a high quality, but there is also much inconsequential material. Stories, etc. It is the very nature of the internet. I'm not convinced that print publication offers a greater service on occasion, but leans towards conservatism of style and approach. Often print journals (scientific, literary) sets a tone, establishing hierarchies, but not necessarily spreads new ideas or work.