More useless PI advice.
Okay, let's recap how this year has gone so far.
Had paper draft since year before. Was already sick of looking at paper.
Was more than sick of being asked what was going on with paper.
Submitted paper with overly grandiose claims to a journal where it wouldn't get in, based on overly optimistic advice of well-meaning PI.
Predictably, paper did not get in.
Had plenty of stamina to revise and plenty of time to send it elsewhere at that point, but no. PI wanted to try an even more ambitious plan, including augmenting paper with numerous uninformative and risky experiments.
Had a bad feeling about this, but wanted so dearly to believe that PI, with much more experience and wisdom, knows more than little MsPhD.
Experiments were done. Not much new could be concluded from them.
Paper is now much longer, arguably not much better, time has run out, and PI is now talking about sending it 'elsewhere' (meaning, the same level of 'elsewhere' where it could have been published in its original form many months ago).
PI won't even take a strong stand on which elsewhere, although some possibilities suggested a month or two ago were shot down.
The same possibilities so recently shot down are now regarded as perfectly reasonable.
When you can't even agree to continue to disagree, and the random changes of opinion occur too late to be useful, one has to wonder why anyone ever thought the apprenticeship model had anything to offer.
I gave up on it long ago.