Scientific paper review is drudgery. I appreciate selfless service of Reviewers, Authors and the Editorial board for effort in getting publishable materials on this journal. What is your responsibility to raise this journal standard? First, Authors must cut-off clutters to reduce workload on peer reviewers. Sometimes, smart authors use tables and figures derived from simulations or mathematical expressions to convenience readers without clear analysis of results to interpret those figures/tables. Secondly, peer reviewers have to move from old-fashioned objective review approach to supportive review (coaching) when dealing with newly established journals. Sometimes offer as much help to the author to raise the standard of paper instead of rejection. Let’s face it, managing editors of new journals may wish to publish more papers to get right accreditation. Until maturity stage, reviewers must go extra mile to offer supportive review to authors in reviews. In many old publishing houses, we have smart reviewers helping smart authors to get works published due to reviewer’s overly responsibilities; teaching, research and services to local entities as well as international journal. Quality is sometimes compromised in many journals. Do we have to repeat the same trend like other journals where we came from to join this editorial board? No. Third, Co-authors who are normally senior members has to take responsibility of papers to ensure quality. Sometimes we are interested getting our names listed as part of a paper. A senior member should consider upholding international reputation and scholarly integrity as professor. Let your name appear on well refined works. In fact, this journal has a promising future; the name caption “IJCNA” and scope of papers consideration is succinct to attract international destination for publishing good works in networks and its broad applications. How can we ensure quality standard before and after publications? Stakeholders must actively collaborate on knowledge-share contributions to ground international reputation through short submissions such as “letter to the editor” on specific publication limitations or similar editorial pieces to draw attention on quality. If you critique your own house, people trust your household. Avoid being smart. In this article “smart” is used in bad context; where already mentioned actors in academic writing decide to underplay due diligence.