While writing for scholarly publications is considered a crucial dimension of academic work, the "publish-or-perish" system in our field has increasingly caused anxiety and induced stress among not only young academics but also more established scholars. Using my own publishing experience as a point of departure, I challenge the assumption that knowledge contribution should be solely or mainly gauged on the basis of the venue of publications. By comparing the perspectives of twelve Asia-based scholars based on data collected from email interviews, I propose that "scholarliness" should be defined by knowledge dissemination and advancement in our field, rather than indexes or journal impact factors. Using the game metaphor, I conclude by offering some tips to survive "publish or perish".