a young scientist submitted

a research paper, the fruit of years of hard work and late nights, to a respected journal. A few
months later, they received an email with a review and began reading it avidly. However,
instead of the expected constructive feedback, I found that one of the reviewers gave a very
harsh and defamatory review. Critics not only attacked the work, but also leveled their personal
criticism against the author. The editors noted that the negative reviews represented Gollum's
resource management and did not reflect the quality of his work. The editor-in-chief of the
journal was personally involved and contacted the reviewers, stating that his tone and
assertions were inappropriate, his stance was against academic progress, and that he would
never serve as a reviewer again. In this case, the magazine's editorial team was very helpful
and supportive. Still, such reviews can be demoralizing for those just beginning their
professional careers, leading young writers to question their worth as researchers. may lead not
only to the abandonment of certain research activities, but to the abandonment of scholarship
altogether.

Damage from Gollum's actions can transcend individuals. For example, our colleagues in Asia
observe that entire research institutions, local and international NGOs, government agencies
and even foreign aid/development organizations can often behave like Gollum. . This is
common in popular and well-known study areas like UNESCO World Heritage Sites and
generally charismatic species like tigers. This means that resources, mainly funds and financial
incentives, become scarce, often dominated by a few individuals or groups, and power
imbalances arise. Corruption, nepotism, and steep hierarchies in both academic and
governmental systems have proven to only feed Gollum.