Unusually for a refereed journal, Architectural Research Quarterly has begun (possibly) a war of words over what it is that other architectural magazines should be publishing. The leader in its latest issue lambasts other (unnamed) editors for 'fighting to be first to publish this or that new building'. According to arq, this 'might be described as architectural vanity publishing', though two lines later it declares it is not vanity after all, but merely 'counterproductive' (I love it when Cambridge boys treat adjectives and nouns as antonyms). It adds that all this publishing- buildings-first stuff damages the image (back to vanity) and reputation of the profession, 'by contradicting our stated goals'. Who has stated them?