Probably the best proxy for quality is popularity that endures for centuries since we can’t measure quality directly. Either way, if there’s a max of one paper per year, scientists will be trying for the most impactful work.
At the same time, reviewers are chosen based on their expertise in a field, and one of the things reviewers look for is that new papers cite relevant prior research. Are you suggesting that reviewers should just let papers go through without citing relevant prior research if it is their own research? Does it actually matter whose research it is as long as it is relevant prior research?
