Chronology of Events in the Suppression
of Dr. LaViolette's Solar Cycle Paper

1)  1985 - 2004 background:  In 1979 Dr. LaViolette made an astounding discovery -- an ancient record describing the impact on our solar system of a Galactic core cosmic ray volley.  This indicated date for the beginning of this event was approximately 15,835 ± 500 years before present.  During subsequent years Dr. LaViolette conducted his Ph.D. dissertation on this topic to investigate if this prehistoric event had actually occurred.  The evidence he gathered all appeared to support this thesis and key tests that he carried out also validated the hypothesis.  Over the years he had published his findings in several journals: Meteoritics, Earth Moon and Planets, Monthly Notices, Eos, and Anthropos and during the course of these years 14 of the predictions stemming from this theory were validated; see Predict.html.
  In September 2000, after reading the paper of Hammer et al. about the discovery of high concentrations of HF and HCl acids in Antarctic ice, he discovered that when the ice core was properly dated, the regular period of these acidity variations matched that of the 11 year solar cycle.  This suggested to him that these acids were of extraterrestrial origin.  He also found that the deposition of these acids coincided with a major change of climate, an initial cooling followed by a warming that eventually ended the last ice age.  The date of the even coincided with the 15,800 years B.P. date indicated in the ancient record Dr. LaViolette had earlier discovered.  Eventually, he realized that these acids were deposited by an incursion of interstellar dustt (or possibly cometary dust) whose entry flux was being modulated by the solar wind in step with the solar cycle.  He concluded that this must be evidence of the climatically significant cosmic dust incursion event that earlier, in his dissertation, he had proposed had energized the Sun, altered the light scattering properties of the interplanetary medium, and brought about a warming of the Earth's climate that ended the last ice age.  In effect, he had discovered what may be the "smoking gun" (or at least the "smoke") that had caused the termination of the last ice age.  The paper he had written about this discovery was finally accepted in October 2004 for publication in Planetary and Space Science.  The paper dealt only with the earth science and astronomical aspects of the discovery and did not discuss any archeoastronomical aspects.

  October 22, 2004, an attempt is made to submit to  The Cornell archive is automated to allow uploads from individuals working at academic and government institutions having email addresses ending in edu or gov.  Dr. LaViolette at that time was doing research on solar water desalination at the California Water Institute facility on the California State University Fresno campus and had been given a CSU Fresno email address.  So, he figured that he should have no trouble to post his paper.  As it turned out, this was not the case.
  On Friday evening, October 22, 2004 he attempted to upload his paper to the astrophysics section of the Cornell archive preprint server.  He had carefully followed the instructions for uploading and had received an automated response giving him a paper ID of astro-ph/0410557 and a paper password of kiz5r.  The auto responder said that his submission was accepted and that his abstract would appear Monday afternoon:

From (send mail ONLY to astro-ph)
Sent Friday, October 22, 2004 9:00 pm

Subject astro-ph/0410557 password (SAVE)

(and forward to any collaborators for safekeeping)

Your user/password combination for this paper is

User-ID: astro-ph/0410557
Password: kiz5r

Your submission astro-ph.starburst.25549 was accepted.

You can view this submission or make changes to it, by logging on with your current username and password. If you would like to grant someone else (co-author,
administrative assistant, ...) the authority to view or change this paper you will need to provide the PaperPassword specific to this submission.

The paper id and paper password for this submission is

PaperId: astro-ph/0410557, PaperPassword: ***** (access still password restricted)

Abstract will appear in mailing scheduled to begin at 20:00 Monday US Eastern time (i.e., Tue 26 Oct 04 00:00:00 GMT).

The above Paper-id/Password combination is necessary if you expect to permit others to update this submission with web replaces, modifications, addenda, or errata: be sure to
save it .
( An e-mail message with this information is also on the way to your registered address:


  October 25, 2004, LaViolette's paper does not appear:  On Monday LaViolette attempts to view his abstract using his paper ID and password, but is unable to view it.  He then puts the paper ID into his browser and an abstract does appear, but it is not the one he posted; it is one belonging to someone else.  Apparently, his paper ID had been reassigned to another person.  Confused about what happened, he sends an email to the archive administration saying:


Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

Archive administrator:
I recently uploaded a paper to the astro-phys archive over the weekend, but it is now Monday and it has not appeared.  When I put in the paper ID that was emailed to me (astro-ph/0410557) I instead get a paper posted by another author (Jacques Laskar).  Can you tell me the correct paper ID? Below is the email I received after I posted the paper.  Has there been a computer error?  Should I repost the paper?

Paul LaViolette


 October 26, 2004, LaViolette's paper is judged inappropriate:  LaViolette receives a reply from the archive stating that his paper was determined to be "inappropriate."  No further explanation was given.  This seemed strange to him considering that his paper had been accepted for publication.  The archive had allowed other scientists to post papers which had been accepted for publication in that same journal.  So why should he be prevented from posting?  The reply he received is reproduced below;

---- Original Message -----
From: "arXiv admin [ams]" <>
Date: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 6:51 am
Subject: Re: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

> Your submission has been removed upon a notice from
> our moderators, who determined it inappropriate for
> the astro-ph archive.
> Please direct all questions and concerns regarding
> moderation to the address.
> --
> arXiv admin


 October 26, 2004:  LaViolette sends an email to the archive moderator asking him to explain why his paper was considered inappropriate. He writes:

Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:56:29 -0700
From: Paul Laviolette <>
Subject: Re: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

Dear arXiv-moderation:
I have been told that my paper submission was removed because it was deemed inappropriate for the
astro-ph archive.  I find this hard to believe!  Could you explain why you have considered it to be

Paul LaViolette


 November 8, 2004:  The registration part of the archive answers him by inquiring about his affiliation to CSUFresno.

From (register-query for
Sent Monday, November 8, 2004 6:57 am
Subject RE: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

What is the precise nature of your current affiliation to ?


 November 9, 2004:  The next day LaViolette sends an email to archive registration giving them further information. He writes:

As project PI, I am conducting solar water desalination research on the California Water Institute facilities on the CSU Fresno campus.  I have an office there.  My phone number is given below if you wish to contact me.

Paul LaViolette

tel: 559-298-xxxx X211
CWI website:


 November 18, 2004:  Archive registration wrote back saying that they could not find his name listed on the CSUFresno website:

From (register-query for 
Sent  Wednesday, November 17, 2004 9:09 am
Subject  RE: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

Your name does not appear on either or
web pages, nor does it appear that the attempted submission is related to
that project.
You should instead submit to a conventional journal for requisite feedback


 November 18, 2004:  LaViolette responded to archive registration telling them that his paper has been accepted for publication.  He reasserted that he is doing solar energy research on the premises of the California Water Institute to hopefully eliminate any doubts and asked for a clarification of their submission rules:

From  Paul Laviolette <> 
Sent  Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:45 am
To (register-query for 
Subject  Re: RE: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

The paper I attempted to post has been accepted for publication in Planetary and Space Sciences.  So you have no reason to block its posting.

My name is indeed not listed on those websites, but for the past 6 months I have been conducting research on the CWI facilities.

The submission is not related to the presently funded solar energy research I am doing here.  Do I understand you correctly that submitters with edu email addresses are restricted to post papers only in the area of their funded research unless those papers have already been submitted to journals for "requisite feedback?"  Please tell me where you have specifically posted instructions on the website to this effect.  Are you saying that others who have posted papers to arXiv are:
a) allowed to post in areas not related to their immedate area of research provided that their paper has been submitted for journal review, and
b) are also allowed to post papers prior to journal submission provided that the paper is related to their immediate area of university research?

Paul LaViolette


 Over three weeks went by without any response from the Archive.  So, LaViolette sent an email requesting a response.

From:  Paul Laviolette <>
Sent:  Monday, December 13, 2004 12:12 pm

Subject:   Re: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted

It has been over three weeks since I sent you my last
email (copied below) and have not heard back. Please
respond. I hope this clears up matters so that I can
post my paper now.

Paul LaViolette

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul <>
Date: Thursday, November 18, 2004




He got no response.  Finally, not wanting to wait any longer, on December 31st he decided to try once again to upload his paper. This time he got the following automatic email response instructing him to get a registered endorser to endorse his paper:

December 31, 2004
Endorsement needed for astro-ph

You must get an endorsement from another user to submit a paper to category astro-ph (Astrophysics).

ArXiv is an openly accessible, moderated repository for scholarly papers in specific scientific disciplines. Material submitted to arXiv is expected to be of interest, relevance, and value to those disciplines. Endorsement is necessary but not sufficient to have a paper accepted in arXiv; arXiv reserves the right to reject or reclassify any submission.

We've sent an email message to with a unique endorsement code; please forward this e-mail to someone authorized to endorse you for category astro-ph (Astrophysics.)

Who is qualified to endorse?

To endorse another user to submit to the astro-ph (Astrophysics) archive, an arXiv submitter must have submitted 4 papers to astro-ph earlier than three months ago and less than five years ago.

You can find out if a particular person is qualified to endorse by looking up one or more of his papers and clicking on the link "Which of the authors of this paper can endorse?" at the bottom of the abstract.

It would be good for you to find an endorser who is connected with you: for instance, if you're a graduate student, your thesis advisor or another professor in your department would be a good choice. Otherwise, you should choose an endorser whose work is related to the subject of your paper.

Your unique endorsement code is: xxxxxx

Why didn't they have the courtesy to respond to his earlier email and tell him that he had to find an endorser?  Why did he find out on his own only after making one more desparate attempt to upload his paper?




December 31, 2004: The search for an endorser begins.    At this point Paul began the long and difficult procedure of trying to locate an endorser.  This process lasted three weeks and took hours and hours of his time and of the people who he had contacted.  During this time he contacted a total of 7 potential endorsers.  Three of these did not bother to answer his email!  He had not sent them his paper, so it had nothing to do with any conceptual disagreement.  One endorser agreed to endorse his paper but was disqualified by because he was not registered to endorse in the astro-ph section which is where LaViolette wished to upload his paper.  Another endorser did not feel qualified since he said he had no background in ice core research.  Yet another endorser did not wish to endorse because she felt there would be an ethical problem of conflict of interest since she was preparing a literature review and would be citing some of his past publications in that review.  Finally, the seventh person he contacted agreed to endorse his paper.  But it turns out that his problems were not over.




January 20, 2005: LaViolette is endorsed and next attempts to upload his paper.
On January 21st, LaViolette once again attempted to upload his paper. This time the arXiv system allowed him to upload and gave him a paper ID number and password:  
  User-ID: astro-ph/0501485
  Password: 2n7yw

  But, when he then put in the ID and password to view his uploaded paper, he got back the automated response "invalid password."  This continued for the next few days.  Then on the fourth day he found that his paper number had been assigned to someone else and that his paper had in fact been suppressed by the administration.  

   At first, confused about the password rejection problem, he wrote to archive administration informing them of the problem:


After having my paper endorsed and uploaded, your system sent me a paper number and paper password (see below). But when I use these to access my listing I get the response that the password is invalid. What do you advise?

Paul LaViolette

There was no reply.  Then, after discovering his paper number had been reassigned, he wrote to them once again.


After having my paper endorsed and uploaded, your system sent me a paper number and paper password (see below). But when I used these to access my listing I got the response that the password is invalid. Now when I put in that astro-ph paper number I see that it has been reassigned to a Ms. G. Shaw. So what has happened to my uploaded paper? I have not had a response also to my previous inquiry of three days ago.

Paul LaViolette

14)    Here he had followed their instructions to get an endorser, spent many days of his time to find someone, including many hours of time of many of the endorsers he had contacted.  He had gotten endorsed, and now after all that effort, arxiv was still suppressing his paper.  Since others who have followed these same procedures have gotten their paper uploaded without a problem, we are left to conclude that arxiv is engaging in blatant discrimination.  So, one can only conclude that Dr. LaViolette's name has been put on some kind of internal blacklist.  Even if he follows the arXiv rules to their fullest extent, in the end it will be to no avail.  This blacklist must be very important since the eprint archive administrators are willing to violate their own posted procedures for endorsement in order to keep his paper away from public view.  
  As mentioned above, it had already been accepted for publication (and they were informed of that).  Second, an endorser had found it worthy of posting.  Third, one of the other endorsers who he had contacted had expressed interest to cite this paper in a literature review she was preparing. She had written to him asking, "What is the reference for the Planetary Space Science paper, or is that the one you want to submit to astro-ph?  If so, send me the reference after it is posted."  So, obviously, their reason for suppression is not because his paper is of poor quality.  One is left to conclude that it is being suppressed for one reason only, namely because he is its author and his name is on a black list.  
  To most people who have grown up believing that we live in a free society, they will hesitate in disbelief.  Surely, there must be some mistake.  


February 1, 2005: NSF Intervenes. On February 1st, Paul called Jack Lightbody, the person in the U. S. National Science Foundation physics division who oversees the funding of physics research projects at Cornell and in particular of grant funding to Paul Ginsparg, director of the program.  Aftering hearing the long story of his difficulties with the people at Cornell, Dr. Lightbody felt some action was warranted and said he would speak to people at Cornell.  
   LaViolette received no word back from responding to his earlier emails.  However, growing impatient, he decided to try once again. On February 3rd he tried once more to upload his paper, this being his third attempt.  This time the uploading was successful and he was given a paper ID and password that worked.  That is, he was able to successfully view his paper abstract without getting any error messages.  

   It was obvious that arxiv administrators released the block on LaViolette's account only because NSF had intervened and expressed their concern over the matter.  When Lightbody finally reached Ginsparg, Ginsparg replied to him that LaViolette is able to post his paper, implying what is all the fuss about?  But the truth is, that this only happened because of NSF's pressure.  NSF's employees are very busy doing what they are supposed to be doing.  They don't have time to be telling Cornell to shape up.  Does a scientist have to go to the extreme of asking NSF's assistance in the matter in order to get his paper posted on the preprint archive?  Although he was able to finally get his paper posted, Paul felt somewhat sad that there are many other free thinking cutting edge scientists whose works were still being suppressed.  He felt why should each of these people go through the same stress he went through, to continually have their emails ignored and to finally have to impose on NSF to help them out.  
    Because of their arrogant practices, the arxiv is literally shattering scientist's spirits and driving them into depression. In his book The Pragmatics of Human Communication, psychologist Paul Watzlawick explained that people who are in a position of power over another person can literally drive crazy a person who is dependent on them.  It is the situation of the classic double bind, where you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.  In this case, Cornell University, which has taken over the electronic archive from Los Alamos National Laboratories, oversees a monopoly in the physics/astronomy community in that there is no other internet archive that is as large or as prominent as this one.  Scientists depend for their careers on communicating effectively their ideas to their colleagues and the internet archive has become an exceptional way to do this since it allows the scientist's paper to be easily accessed by others.  Blocking certain individuals from participating in this internet superhighway injures their careers and their lives as a whole.


Arxiv automatically reclassifies Dr. LaViolette's paper.   But, although Dr. LaViolette was able to upload his paper, problems still remained.  The arXiv moderators had put in an automated routine which, upon detecting his name as the submitting author, would automatically reclassify any paper he uploaded and place it in the archive's physics category.  In other words, it seems that regardless of which archive category he would be endorsed to submit to and regardless of what paper he chose to submit, it would automatically be redirected against his will to the physics category.  They did such an automated reclassification to his solar cycle paper without any explanation or apology, giving it the following classification: physics/0502019.  They imposed this same maneuver when he later submitted his Pioneer Effect paper to the general relativity/quantum cosmology category.  Like his solar cycle paper, it was reclassified to the physics section; see Case History I.  Moreover they barred him from cross-listing his paper to the astro-ph section, which is where it belonged in the first place.  An attempt by LaViolette to cross-list his paper was met with the following automated response:
   "physics/0502019 is not appropriate for cross-listing to astro-ph"
He found this very strange since the paper dealt with a topic that is of interest both to astrophysics and to Earth science, since it reports ice core evidence of the influx of a large amount of interstellar dust into the solar system and its effect on the Sun and on the Earth's climate.  

     The archive moderators have done this same maneuver to other physicists whose work they do not approve of, some of whose names appear on the ArchiveFreedom website in the "partial blacklist" category.  Just as happened to Dr. LaViolette, arxiv reclassified the papers of these scientists without explanation, imprisoning them in the physics category, a classification that most often does not fit the subject of their paper.  Moreover they too were barred from cross-listing their papers to other categories.   Since other physicists are allowed to post their papers to the category where they fit best and are also allowed to cross-list those papers to other categories without a problem, arxiv's practice of singling out and restricting a few people they personally don't happen to like gives the impression of shameless discrimination.


February 7, 2005:  Dr. LaViolette notifies arxiv of the problem.  
LaViolette wrote to the moderators complaining about the relcassification of his paper:

Date: 2/7/05
Subj.: Crosslisting is blocked

Earlier I emailed my complaint that my paper was not posted in the astro-ph section as I had intended, but was instead posted in the physics section (physics/0502019). Now I see also that the ability to cross list my paper has been blocked. An attempt to cross list it to astro-ph was met with the following response "physics/0502019 is not appropriate for cross-listing to astro-ph." This is not true, the paper deals with an astrophysical subject, the influx of interstellar dust into the solar system and its effect on the Earth's climate.
Can you tell me why a block was put on cross-listing my paper. Why are other scientists allowed to cross list their papers and I am not?
I request that my paper either be posted in the astro-ph section or be cross listed to astro-ph.

Paul LaViolette

He received no response from them.


February 16, 2005:  Arxiv arbitrarily reclassifies his second uploaded paper.

   Dr. LaViolette attempted to upload a second paper to the astrophysics section.  But, the arxiv system prevented him from uploading it, responding only with an error message.  To make matters worse, when he tried to become endorsed to post a third paper to the gr-qc (general relativity/quantum cosmology) section, arxiv ignored the endorsement and retaliated by revoking the endorsing priveleges of the endorser (for more see Case History I)
Having received no response about the difficulty with his first paper, he wrote to the moderators again notifying them that his second submission was being blocked:

Date: 2/16/05

The following is a different issue than I have written to you before . I have previously been endorsed to upload papers to astro-ph. I understand that one needs only to be endorsed once to upload papers to a particularly category. Now I attempted to upload a new paper to the astro-ph category and have received the following error message:
<< Error
The following error has occured:
Internal error: Invalid category id [astro-ph.H?v`H?vR°?¶$y?oreFiles]

on page:
The operators of have been notified.
Return to

Why am I being blocked? Also I am waiting for an answer to my previous question regarding being blocked from uploading to gr-qc as well.

Paul LaViolette

He received no reply.


February 24, 2005:  He again contacts the moderators.

Two weeks having gone by and having received no reply, he again wrote to the moderators:

From  Paul Laviolette <> 
Sent  Thursday, February 24, 2005 8:53 am
Subject  Waiting for a response to my previous emails to you

Dear moderator,

It has been almost two weeks since my earliest emails to you and
I have not had a response.  These concern my being blocked from
uploading to astro-ph and gr-qc, and cross listing to astro-ph even
though I have been endorsed to upload to both of these sections.
Why have you not responded?

Paul LaViolette

He received no reply.


March 18, 2005:  He uploads his second paper, but it is also reclassified to physics.

Finally, after three weeks had gone by, the moderators wrote to him:

From (moderation for 
Sent  Friday, March 18, 2005 6:36 am
Subject  Re: (moderation) uploading to astro-ph is blocked

It appears to be an issue with your browser software.  We cannot
repeat the problem locally.

   What they said was not correct since he had used three different browsers, two of which were quite up to date, and had gotten the same error message with all of them.  But he thought he would make yet another attempt to upload his paper to see what would happen.  This time the system does not stop him from uploading.  Obviously, they had done something to correct the situation.  They did not want to admit that they had previously been blocking his paper and so tried to blame it on his browser.  
   But, still there were problems.  Again, an automated routine detected his name and reclassified his paper, sending it to the physics section categorized as: physics/0503158.  Like his other paper submission, he was unable to cross-list this second paper to the astro-ph section.

  He again wrote to the moderators:

Subj: Re: (moderation) uploading to astro-ph is blocked
Date: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:23:37 PM

Dear moderator,
After receiving your email, I again logged on and this time was able to access the astro-ph section without an error message. However, when I submitted my paper to astro-ph, it was instead immediately given a physics category ID number. This has nothing to do with the subject of my paper not being appropriate since it does discuss an astronomical phenomenon and there was no time for anyone to do an evaluation since this automatic response occurred within seconds of my upload.
The response said "your submission astro-ph.starburst.15002 was accepted. Then on the same page it gave as a PaperID number: physics/0503158.
So, why am I still blocked from uploading to astro-ph?

Paul LaViolette

LaViolette once again contacted Jack Lightbody of NSF hoping that he could do something to remedy the reclassification of his papers:

To Jack Lightbody, NSF

Dear Jack,
A change occurred today in that now allowed me to upload my paper to the astro-ph section (whereas before I would get an error message when I attempted to access that section). However, when I uploaded to astro-ph, my paper was automatically classified in the physics section. This happened within seconds. Since no one had time to read my paper, it is apparent that the block preventing me from uploading to the astro-ph section is still in effect and that nothing really has changed. I assume the situation is same for my access to the gr-qc section. Also they still block my attempts to crosslist my other uploaded paper to the astro-ph section. Recall that my previous paper was also automatically blocked and switched to physics.

Could you call me to discuss what they told you about my situation.

Below is an email I sent to them today complaining about the first situation mentioned above.

Paul LaViolette

With no action being taken to change his quarantine situation, he again wrote to Lightbody two weeks later:

To Jack Lightbody, NSF

Dear Jack,

There are several problems that still have not been resolved with my uploading account with
1) has been blocking me from uploading to the gr-qc section. When I go to upload to that section, I get back a message saying that I should get endorsed and I am given a code for seeking endorsement. However, I have already been endorsed to this section on February 11th. Only one endorsement is necessary for uploading to a given section. So, it is puzzling why is ignoring my February 11th endorsement and is asking me to seek endorsement. I have followed their rules and am still excluded from uploading to their site. I see this as unequal treatment since many other physicists who get endorsement do not experience this kind of treatment. Since the time of my endorsement, I have not been allowed to upload to this section and it has been very aggravating. The only response to my emails to has been that they consider that something is wrong with my browser. In my opinion they are making this up. I have used three different browsers from two different computers and the result is always the same. I informed that my browser is not the problem, but apparently they have chosen to not respond to my email. My paper has now been accepted for publication in a refereed journal and still this same blocking by continues without any reason. It is very important that this paper is posted as soon as possible since it notifies my colleagues of my theory's early a priori prediction of the Pioneer Effect which was subsequently confirmed by the data.

2) I have also been endorsed to upload to the astro-ph (astrophysics) section of, but every time I do, my paper is automatically classified in the physics section without regard to its content. This indicates that they have put an automatic procedure in place to reclassify my paper whenever their system detects my name as the paper's author. This is a discriminative practice that few other physicists have to put up with who are allowed to upload to the archive. I strongly urge that it be stopped. My latest upload to astrophysics was given a paper number "physics/0503158. Shortly afterward the same day (prior to its official appearance) I asked the paper be withdrawn from being posted to avoid its misclassification. But the moderators have refused to take any action and allowed it to stay misclassified. They have sent no email to me about their failure to take action. This indicates that the transfers are not due to any inadvertent mistake of the software, but rather are due to a concerted effort of the moderators to suppress my work from the astrophysics section even though I have been endorsed to upload to that section.

3) The moderators still prevent me from crosslisting any of my posted papers to the astrophysics section (which is where they should be posted) and give no reason for doing so.

These practices are intolerable and should be stopped. Please see what you can do to correct this situation.


Paul LaViolette, Ph.D.

   But NSF accomplished nothing.  In May, LaViolette complained to Dr. Dehmer, head of the NSF physics section about the unethical practices that the Cornell arxiv was engaging in.  Dehmer assigned one of his staff, Pat Bautz, to call and take notes about what was happening.   LaViolette's later left many phone messages inquiring as to what action NSF had taken, but his calls were not returned. He only received a brief email from Bautz stating: "NSF intends that they [Cornell University Library] will implement appropriate screening practices to assure that the arXiv conforms to Cornell University academic standards."


June 6, 2005:  LaViolette contacts the Cornell University Library, but they take no action.

   LaViolette then contacted Pat Diele, a librarian involved in the arxiv project to see if there was anything she could do to ensure that his papers were placed in the proper category.  She agreed to look into the matter.  But, when he called back to inquire about what was going to be done to remedy the situation, all she was: "The board is considering it."  Here she was referring to the arxiv board of directors.  He pointed out to her that this did not sound like a very promising answer since that is the standard reply that they give to avoid taking action.  When he asked her if she would give him a way to contact some of the board members about the matter, she refused.  She then said:

"I have done all that I can do.  The conversation is over."  

Without even saying a pleasant good by, she then hung up,  

   So that is where things stand today.  After three years of effort, LaViolette is finally allowed to post papers to the arxiv, but he is quarantined to post them only to the physics section.  It seems that even if he is awarded a Nobel prize for his work, this is unlikely change arxiv's discriminatory treatment.  Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson, for example, was quarantined to the physics section after trying to assist a colleague to post a paper on the subject of cold fusion, a subject that the arxiv apparently regards as tabou.  No matter how many times he complained asking to be allowed once again to post to the condensed matter section of the archive, the arxiv administration refused to lift their ban; see his case study.