3 ms·

Arxiv has been working just fine for a long time, there's no need to change it. Besides I'm not going to voluntarily post my work so I can get publicly rated by

• markhahn 3y ago
  You're thinking of social-media-type "reputation". Instead, think of the goal being to associate measures of worth with the reviewers. If you're publicly rated by a bunch of worthwhile people, count yourself lucky.
• eru 3y ago
  > Arxiv has been working just fine for a long time, there's no need to change it. Exactly, that's why I am not suggesting any change to Arxiv. Think more of people eg submitting Arxiv URLs to Hacker News for what I have in mind. Or discussing Arxiv submission on a forum or in a wiki etc. You can imagine some specialised software that has some better support specifically for material from Arxiv. That's what I mean by 'overlay'. Or think of Slatestarcodex publishing a blog post with links to his favourite Arxiv papers for that month. That's pretty much equivalent to what a journal produces. And if Slatestarcodex compiles that link list by doing some peer review and chatting with the authors of the papers, that's almost exactly what the journal does.