Really interesting reflections on successful efforts to diversity a journal. The most intriguing bit to me is her cogent and interesting case against triple anonymous review, something I’ve been an advocate for. It gives me much to think about. But I urge you read the whole thing!
I have no problem with a couple of journals making use of standpoint epistemology to justify not using triple blind review. But it would be a mistake for all or most or many journals to do this; at least, that’s how it seems to this philosopher who finds standpoint epistemology highly implausible. Thankfully, that’s unlikely to happen. However, again, I do think it’s good or at least permissible for some journals to do this – after all, there’s no guarantee I’m right about standpoint epistemology being bunk!