An Arxiv paper by itself should not be valuable. People should understand what an unreviewed preprint means. People should understand peer review does not mean correct. People should understand that counting publications in a cv is a bad way to assess scientific merit.

I fundamentally dislike these busibodies for whom the already existing endorsement gatekeeping isn't enough. Science is not an institution and not a community but an attitude towards understanding reality.

I dislike quacks and cranks. But I don't mind if they can host their nonsense online alongside real papers on an explicitly unreviewed site. It's a bad precedent and will just ratchet more and more close to reviewing except not by blinded peers but by the Arxiv overlords based on vibes and political valence.