So a meta question is ... recently there was a bit of a hubbub about arxiv not posting preprints from academics with findings critical of the big bang. The clai

So a meta question is ... recently there was a bit of a hubbub about arxiv not posting preprints from academics with findings critical of the big bang. The claim was basically that arxiv isn't supposed to be refereed or edited that way, and that discussions that are at odds with established mainstream views should still be accepted. At the other end of the spectrum, the USPTO won't look into anyone's claim to have invented a perpetual motion device. And the social networks will flag me if I claim that my one cool trick will stop covid transmission. Sometimes you don't have to look closely into a claim to be pretty sure it's false, and possibly harmful in some way. _Should_ there be any upstream filtering on arxiv posting when an unknown person claims to have an extremely surprising result, and their reference list suggests that they may be disconnected from the literature in the relevant field? Is there any kind of claim that _should_ be proactively rejected?