2 ms·
This goes both ways. It’s obviously an unfortunate barrier to entry but it generally means the content on the arxiv is reputable and meets a certain bar (and su
by dan-robertson 7y ago
This goes both ways. It’s obviously an unfortunate barrier to entry but it generally means the content on the arxiv is reputable and meets a certain bar (and submission is not in any way anonymous because members are verified which can discourage low quality submissions). Compare the arxiv to vixra. It seems unfair to Cornell university library to have them moderate submissions for scientific quality and those people who currently use it would not want to have to filter through the new papers in their topic of interest to determine which papers were worth reading and which would be a largely wrong waste of time (I think here I’m perhaps being a bit unfair and for many fields there would likely be no time wasters and in others it would be easy if annoying to filter out the p=np or Riemann hypothesis papers)
I don’t think that letting anyone submit is a good solution.
- chrisseaton 7y ago> I don’t think that letting anyone submit is a good solution. I think their process is totally reasonable and I’d probably do the same... but I do think it’s a fact that it’s now less accessible and more based on reputation and credentials and we should acknowledge that.
- dan-robertson 7y agoI agree