I've been following this thread at Leiter the last couple of days. It's the same old song about how terrible the editorial procedures are at philosophy journals, and how other disciplines would run their editors out of town on a rail for practices that we consider to be especially responsible. Practices such as egregiously long review times and comment-free rejections. A number of people have rightly pointed out that we shouldn't tolerate this kind of behavior.
But--and I mean this in sympathetic, unchallenging way--I don't see what choice we have. If every journal is terrible, what alternative to tolerating their behavior do we have? Short of not publishing at all, I mean.
I guess the journals wiki is a start, but is it having an impact? Are journals allowing the wiki to affect their editorial procedures?
P.S. It was also suggested that journals should charge authors for submitting articles. I think this would be a terrible idea. I agree that such a plan would definitely cut down on the number of submissions. However, I don't see why it would cut down on bad submissions; it would cut down on submissions from the non-wealthy.