The Voynich Ninja

How about a ninja prize for a VMs solution to the general satisfaction of the forum?

Prize: Ten Ninja 'Reputation' points.

(20-11-2021, 01:14 AM)R. Sale Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Prize: Ten Ninja 'Reputation' points.

Steady on old boy, let's not get carried away!

Should Tokai and Kiraly get a prize for solving the Rohonc Codex?

Note that their very significant undertaking was done without the lure of such a prize.

I would think that it seems perfectly reasonable for a prize having been awarded for the decipherment of the Rohonc Codex.

I can't comment specifically on the work of Tokai and Kiraly as I don't know it and I know very little about the Rohonc Codex.

Unfortunately, prizes are rarely created after the event, so it is unlikely that they would be awarded such a prize unless a different pre-existing prize was appropriate.

A valid solution to me, would give a deciphered text that is reproducible, verifiable, logical and comprehensible.

(22-11-2021, 12:48 AM)Davidsch Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A valid solution to me, would give a deciphered text that is reproducible, verifiable, logical and comprehensible.

I think we need to get better at handling the non-solutions. It seems to me that the many non-solutions often were arrived at through a similar methodology and lead to a similar solution structure. So it should be easy to identify a given new solution as fitting this general pattern. I suspect that the true solution is going to be quite different in the methodology by which it was arrived at and the final solution structure. (Often there tend to be significant degrees of freedom in interpretation by the decipherer amongst the non-solutions through mechanisms like multiple possible source languages/dialects.)

A better way of addressing non-solutions would reduce the amount of time wasted on addressing these solutions.

I myself designed a test and I am sure more could be done to further that approach. There may also be other ways we can easily dismiss non-solutions.

This would mean that even if there are more non-solutions submitted in response to a prize then we should be able to handle them much more easily.

To put it in other words, perhaps, the goal is to turn VMs glyphs into intelligible language. If that is possible, for which there is no guarantee.

We don't know what the solution is, but perhaps we already know something of what it is not. A number of problematic solutions have been based on the phonetic interpretation of the EVA symbols. Turning the resultant phonetic sequences into words has been the methodology for a number of failed proposals. Yet in spite of the possibility of this fundamental flaw, such proposals have received considerable promotion and discussion. Wouldn't want the forum to languish in silence, now, would we?

Of course, it is always possible that the VMs glyph that is represented by EVA - o is actually a phonetic 'o'. If it were simple and straight-forward, it wouldn't be the VMs.

(22-11-2021, 05:55 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A better way of addressing non-solutions would reduce the amount of time wasted on addressing these solutions.

I myself designed a test and I am sure more could be done to further that approach. There may also be other ways we can easily dismiss non-solutions.

This would mean that even if there are more non-solutions submitted in response to a prize then we should be able to handle them much more easily.

If I ruled the world, I would make all those who have found the solution complete a pro-forma before their claims can even be discussed, with mandatory questions such as "How does your solution explain line patterns such as ...", "How does your solution explain Scribe 1 doing X, while Scribe 3 does Y", etc.    So many people who believe they've found the solution, especially after a couple of hours browsing, aren't even aware of any, let alone all, of the manuscript's disturbing patterns.  

I think there was a website - maybe it was CypherBrain or Nick - that created a test.  They posted several lines taken from the manuscript, and one that is made up using scrambled Voynichese words and thus would be nonsense.  But only someone who had the true solution, or who cheated by looking up a transcription, would be able to tell which was the made up one. 

I liked that idea in principle, but I can't help but think that some people with extremely strong "sword in the stone syndrome" would still convince themselves that the test is at fault, not their solution, and so failing or in extreme cases even cheating it might not matter.

Edit: found the test You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

It seems easier to create a section in this forum. For example, with the title: "I decided the secret of MS408," "MS408 solved," etc.
In this section, the authors will prove their superiority.
Research topics will be cleared of such posts.
In this section, the moderator can maintain Internet links on the topic "The manuscript is decrypted."

(22-11-2021, 05:55 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A better way of addressing non-solutions would reduce the amount of time wasted on addressing these solutions.

Promising a prize for solutions will be very (very) counter-productive to achieving that goal.