In this article Prof. James Hartley, points the finger to the present system and standards of evaluation narrowly based on publication metrics (impact factors, citation rates etc.); his view is that the authors themselves are better judges of their own work rather than – as he put it – “automated bean counters”. He addresses weaknesses and inconsistencies of evaluation metrics currently used (by the two well-known databases called Web of Science and PubMed) with examples of publications of his own.