A little while ago someone asked (now deleted, but link still here: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314572/advice-on-how-i-can-i-publish-my-solution-of-the-riemann-hypothesis?noredirect=1#comment784775_314572), somewhat pretentiously, how they can publish their proof of a 'famous conjecture in analytic number theory'. It is later revealed that the 'famous conjecture' in question is actually RH, and soon after they posted the full 'solution' in the question component. It was downvoted hard, but before I saw the end of it it was deleted.

Just a few days later, this question popped up: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314776/on-some-expression-in-bui-et-als-paper-and-the-riemann-hypothesis

It is extremely likely that both the asker of the question and the user 'YNWA' are the same person, and both are the same person as the original poster of the deleted question. Their posts are virtually identically, and the accepted 'answer' is almost verbatim the 'proof' in the deleted question.

Thus, it seems to me that this is all a somewhat elaborate ruse on the part of the user to get their 'proof' accepted by the mathematical community.

I don't think this kind of behaviour belongs on MO; it attracts the wrong kind of crowd here. I would be very much incensed if people constantly post dubious, two-page 'proofs' of famous conjectures here constantly and ask for approval from professional mathematicians who frequent here.

Is there any official stance on such phenomena, and if there is a policy in place, whether effective enforcement methods are put into place?

Edit: the title refers to a triple of questions, and the third one is this (also deleted): https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314792/an-integral-involving-log-zetas

A little while ago someone asked (now deleted, but link still here: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314572/advice-on-how-i-can-i-publish-my-solution-of-the-riemann-hypothesis?noredirect=1#comment784775_314572), somewhat pretentiously, how they can publish their proof of a 'famous conjecture in analytic number theory'. It is later revealed that the 'famous conjecture' in question is actually RH, and soon after they posted the full 'solution' in the question component. It was downvoted hard, but before I saw the end of it it was deleted.

Just a few days later, this question popped up: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314776/on-some-expression-in-bui-et-als-paper-and-the-riemann-hypothesis

It is extremely likely that both the asker of the question and the user 'YNWA' are the same person, and both are the same person as the original poster of the deleted question. Their posts are virtually identical, and the accepted 'answer' is almost verbatim the 'proof' in the deleted question.

Thus, it seems to me that this is all a somewhat elaborate ruse on the part of the user to get their 'proof' accepted by the mathematical community.

I don't think this kind of behaviour belongs on MO; it attracts the wrong kind of crowd here. I would be very much incensed if people constantly post dubious, two-page 'proofs' of famous conjectures here and ask for approval from professional mathematicians who frequent here.

Is there any official stance on such phenomena, and if there is a policy in place, whether effective enforcement methods are put into place?

Edit: the title refers to a triple of questions, and the third one is this (also deleted): https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314792/an-integral-involving-log-zetas

A little while ago someone asked (now deleted, but link still here: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314572/advice-on-how-i-can-i-publish-my-solution-of-the-riemann-hypothesis?noredirect=1#comment784775_314572), somewhat pretentiously, how they can publish their proof of a 'famous conjecture in analytic number theory'. It is later revealed that the 'famous conjecture' in question is actually RH, and soon after they posted the full 'solution' in the question component. It was downvoted hard, but before I saw the end of it it was deleted.

Just a few days later, this question popped up: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314776/on-some-expression-in-bui-et-als-paper-and-the-riemann-hypothesis

It is extremely likely that both the asker of the question and the user 'YNWA' are the same person, and both are the same person as the original poster of the deleted question. Their posts are virtually identically, and the accepted 'answer' is almost verbatim the 'proof' in the deleted question.

Thus, it seems to me that this is all a somewhat elaborate ruse on the part of the user to get their 'proof' accepted by the mathematical community.

I don't think this kind of behaviour belongs on MO; it attracts the wrong kind of crowd here. I would be very much incensed if people constantly post dubious, two-page 'proofs' of famous conjectures here constantly and ask for approval from professional mathematicians who frequent here.

Is there any official stance on such phenomena, and if there is a policy in place, whether effective enforcement methods are put into place?

A little while ago someone asked (now deleted, but link still here: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314572/advice-on-how-i-can-i-publish-my-solution-of-the-riemann-hypothesis?noredirect=1#comment784775_314572), somewhat pretentiously, how they can publish their proof of a 'famous conjecture in analytic number theory'. It is later revealed that the 'famous conjecture' in question is actually RH, and soon after they posted the full 'solution' in the question component. It was downvoted hard, but before I saw the end of it it was deleted.

Just a few days later, this question popped up: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314776/on-some-expression-in-bui-et-als-paper-and-the-riemann-hypothesis

It is extremely likely that both the asker of the question and the user 'YNWA' are the same person, and both are the same person as the original poster of the deleted question. Their posts are virtually identically, and the accepted 'answer' is almost verbatim the 'proof' in the deleted question.

Thus, it seems to me that this is all a somewhat elaborate ruse on the part of the user to get their 'proof' accepted by the mathematical community.

I don't think this kind of behaviour belongs on MO; it attracts the wrong kind of crowd here. I would be very much incensed if people constantly post dubious, two-page 'proofs' of famous conjectures here constantly and ask for approval from professional mathematicians who frequent here.

Is there any official stance on such phenomena, and if there is a policy in place, whether effective enforcement methods are put into place?

Edit: the title refers to a triple of questions, and the third one is this (also deleted): https://mathoverflow.net/questions/314792/an-integral-involving-log-zetas