Hello, who could be able to endorse me so that I can publish on arxiv about Riemann Hypothesis?

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

I argue it's a chicken and egg problem -- it has a bad reputation because people give it a bad reputation. It has tons of bad papers, and by some arbitrary metric of "average paper quality" it has a low score, and because of that, people assign *every* paper there a bad rap.

Necessary triage - who has time to wade through hundreds of crap papers in search of a rare good one? People have lives and only-24-hours-in-a-day constraints. Given the massive overall quality difference, reputable authors who post stuff that is arXiv-worthy on viXra have only themselves to blame for being ignored and/or tarred with the broad 'junk' brush applicable to the site.

[Disclaimer: Having previously several papers in top academic journals and more-recently 2 papers in different disciplines on arViv I can vouch for the fact that some kind of 'peer review' in order to secure an endorsement-to-post is invaluable. And I very much like the open-access nature of arXiv over the milieu of paywalled journals.]

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Necessary triage - who has time to wade through hundreds of crap papers in search of a rare good one?

Originally Posted by Dubslow

It may not be a good place to find papers objectively speaking and I agree, but it's not a good place to leave papers merely because of outside perception (i.e. that's a subjective statement independent of the "average quality metric"). If I put a paper there and asked people here to read it, would I immediately be labeled a crank merely because of my choice of hosting? I surely could not put a paper on arXiv even if I wanted to (short of making a post here identical to OP's, upon which I might be judged differently only because of my history here, not because of the content of my OP).

.