Currently, the impact and worth of a publication to a researcher is measured by the prestige of the journal it is published in and citation count of the paper itself. This is problematic for many reasons, which have been pointed out ad nauseam by researchers with little change. To change, or rather improve, the system we need to change the incentives! Steps towards a world where article-level based metrics are used over journals has already started to occur and many papers today show metrics and altmetrics of their impact, allowing readers to assess how the work has been cited and shared. However, the measure of prestige (impact factor) has also been shown to correlate with retractions \cite{Fang_2011}. Thus, current incentives reward researchers for flashy work. But what about being right? What about sharing data? What about publishing work that is not "sexy"? It is done surely, but it does not advance a researchers career.