One idea that I don’t want us to lose from yesterday was the idea that a fraud/plagarism/quakery check need not be the responsibility of any one person. Yes, there’s likely an automated step to check for plagarism, but, after that, having a preprint randomly sent to, say, 5-10 people with the option of clicking a “report abuse option” (and then enter what kind of abuse) may well prove to be as efficient at culling bad items out of a preprint literature as any.

That, and it allows for an alternative archive of bunk. Which can be fairly useful, particularly when one wants to cite that a certain “point” is actually garbage, as it were.