matt is right. refereeing is a difficult, time consuming, anonymous, and essentially thankless job. I received a lengthy and difficult paper some time back that I had no time to review, but a few months later I received it back again with a personal apeal from the editor, since no one else could be found to review it either.
I accepted but said it woiuld take a long time. 7 months later or mroe I received a followup appeal from the editor, but i was still checking laboriously, every detail in the terse arguments, and every reference of the sort " this proved in my [300 page] paper", with no specific page citation.
It was very impressive, but the logic was not clear. When I finished after one year, and laid it all out clearly, there was a big gap in the argument. He had simply assumed some other author, whose work he used, had proved an if and only if statement where in fact that author only proved an "only if" statement.
I sent it back with a favorable review but pointing out the gap. A couple weeks later the author sent back a revised version with a "completed" version of the other authiors work.
I did not have time to c=verify this so just let it go.
There is no guarantee from em that the mpaper is correct, and indeed I am very rare in even checking as far as I do the correctness of authors's works.
Matt is giving you valuable free advice here. If you cannot get your work refereed it is probably because it is not clearly enough written to make it possible to review without great effort, and that effort is not justified in the case of a theorem whose proof from anyone is so difficult that it is likely to be wrong.
