It’s usually a bad sign when someone invokes “fairness” in a policy dispute. In the worst cases, it functions, rhetorically, to give lexical priority to either strict equality or to individual complaints against a proposed change, while ignoring the really important question of net benefit.1
I was reminded of this after my proposed solution to the referee crisis was picked up by the Daily Nous. One commenter complained that, even if University departments offered a limited subsidy to their members, “this would just2 unfairly advantage those who could pay for extra submissions out of their own pocket (and thus disadvantage grad students and TTs).”