Publishing hassles

Basically, publishing is such a hassle. You have to deal with a plethora of weak-minded fools who fail to appreciate your brilliance, and are such a stickler for supposed "conventions" that people typically follow when they publish, like using citations or reading other papers. Recently I have been trying to get my work into a very high-profile journal (Woodpeckers at some Paraguayan sites [WASPS]) but have been burdened with constant unnecessary red tape that stands in my way.

For example, everyone at WASPS is such a stickler for citations on statements verifying such and such has been published and where such and such got published. Can't they just realize I know what I'm talking about? Last week I wrote a great paper on the woodpeckers that pound on my house when I try to nap that I was going to send to Ornithologica Paraguayae, but before I could save it, the power went off. I cited it in the WASPS paper anyway. I wrote it, and it had some totally good stuff in there, so I just wrote it up as a citation. I can't be bothered to make sure all of my publications are "real". I can see how that is necessary for lesser biologists who may not be smart enough to think for themselves, but I shouldn't really need facts to backup my statements, they're just obviously correct because I know what I'm talking about. Citations are so worthless. That goes for THE Citations too, man they annoy me.



In fact, why should I be forced to read lesser papers? Why do I even need to cite other people's work, it's basically pointless when I already know everything. I abhor reading, and when someone sends me an email, I generally don't read it. What could they possibly have to tell me that I don't already know? Besides, reading is boring and tiring, if you really want to communicate something to me, you should just send me a picture. So why on earth would I read some crap that somebody else wrote? When I write a paper, I generally, to supplement the citations of real and hypothetical papers that I have written/may have written/will never write/could write if I cared, just skim the titles of papers that others have written, and include those if they seem potentially relevant. That's basically good enough to appease the so called "citation police". After all, reading other people's work is just a waste of time when you're the kind of person who has been immortalized with a statue.