The Voynich Ninja

Thank you Koen Gh!
Yes, that is what I had in mind.
I'll copy your image here for convenience:


Those signs, with the diagonal line of dots leading to the circle are a pretty perfect match for what we see in 116v, except for the fact that the 116v one is upside down and to the side of the text rather than above it.
Still, I find this example particularly compelling, especially in light of Davidsch's comment over there that they are part of some sort of spell or charm. In this sense, they are like the crosses in the line of text above.

(16-10-2016, 10:13 AM)Davidsch Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The dots you see are part of the kabbalistic work, but are not part of the text as far i can see.

This page is about some mystical sort of permutations of words/names.

---

• pp. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.-You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. Collection of kabbalistic and magical pieces. Includes, inter alia, Seder Sod Etz ha-Hayyim(pp. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.-You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), spells and charms, among them by R. Jacob Berab [the third] (p. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), queries, among them by R. Shabbetai (pp. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.-You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.), permutations, Holy names, etc.
  

• pp. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.-You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (in a different 17th cent. hand): Spells, including incantation bowels with drawings, instructions to exorcise possessing spirits from the book Or Tzach u-Metzuchtzach, an otherwise unknown tract and a tradition from R. Jacob Berab "may he live" who received it from R. Hayyim Vital.
  

@Views: see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ( University of Technology Eindhoven, "Puncta extraordinaria" ).

I have seen dot lines at the beginning of a line in other Hebrew manuscripts. Whether these are also "Puncta extraordinaria" or not I can't say.

Random example: British Library, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. , Kabbalistic collectaneum, 1300-1399, fol. 21v and fol. 60v


Edit:  You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. explanation looks useful.

For the record, my links are good again (including the one to my observations about this folio in May 2016):

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


[Off topic: For anyone else who ever starts getting blank screens on their Wordpress blogs, the problem appears to have been a cache plugin called endurance, inserted by the server host without informing users. Disabling it by renaming the directory seems to correct the problem (although there's always the danger the host will reinsert it). I don't know if it's the presence of the plugin or its interaction with other plugins that causes the problem, but it's an annoying one to locate and diagnose, which is why I thought I would mention it.]

Thank you bi3mw!
So, based on these links, the dots either a) signal a word or letter which is dubious, and should perhaps be omitted, or b) serve as a marker to remember some type of exegesis about the word or letter.
What remains unclear to me after reading these links is whether the single dots above or below letters serve the same purpose as the rows of dots like the ones in Koen Gh's example (rows of dots ending in a small circle) or the ones your examples in Add. MS 15299 which lead towards the margin.

There are five dots.

It seems to me that the other examples deal with single dots that mark words?

But wait... in the Hebrew MS I posted, do these dots 'point' to specific letters? Because the line of dots in the VM does seem to point to a letter in the word above.

Marking a dubious place would be a nice explanation. The line of dots leads to the +ma+ria+ (more specifically - to "ma"), where "maria" is a common word, but a cross is inserted in between, making it "ma" + "ria". Were this spell copied from another source, the scribe may have been in doubt whether "maria" is a single word there or is not. The fact that the middle cross is added afterwards is of itself evidence of a certain  "doubt", since it is apparently added afterwards, be that in the original (unknown to us) or only in this copy (the VMS).

Koen Gh and Anton:
Very interesting that the dots could be seen to point towards the line above.
I find the combination of christian signs and jewish ones on the same folio particularly interesting. To quote one of the sources given by bi3mw:
"If Elijah comes and says: 'Why are all these letters dotted? This is what Ezra said: `If Elijah comes and says "Why did you write (them)?" I will say to him, "I have dotted them"; but if he tells me, "You have written well", I will remove the dots from them.' "
In light of that, here's a little speculation...
If the dots relate to +ma+ria+... could it be a way of saying the scribe is uncomfortable with having written down Mary's name or even the crosses in that spell, and added the dots as a precaution or disclaimer? To paraphrase the above quote, if Elijah comes and says, "why did you use a christian reference?", I will say to him, "I have dotted it".

I don't think that he was uncomfortable with the name itself. I think he was uncomfortable with whether the source from which he copied the spell had it as "maria" or "ma ria". If there were crosses in the original, he would have just copied those without hesitation, and no doubts would have arisen. Probably the original was "plain text" - without crosses - so he just copies it "as is", and then places crosses wherever he thinks appropriate. What is a bit strange in this respect is that there is no cross after "anchiton"; if "carcere" is a single word, then "anchiton oladabas" is the only place where two words are not separated by a cross. So he sees something like "ma ria" and wonders whether there is a space in between - much like we now wonder whether there is a space between "car" and "cere". First, he thinks that "maria" is a single word, since it sounds natural. An he puts it down as such. But later he decides to correct it in order to be closer to the source, and marks them as two separate words by inserting a cross in between. To mark this "ma" as dubious, he puts those dots. Interestingly, to all appearance, "ria" is unquestioned by him, because dots clearly lead to "ma".

In the Hebrew MS b3 linked, it seems like lines of a varying number of dots are used to either mark certain words, or connect them to a short note on the side. Might our scribe be using a Hebrew convention to denote that the "a" should be an "O" in his opinion?