Questions needed for Stephen Bax interview

[VViews]

Getting back to the topic at hand, which was questions to S. Bax:
-  Stephen Bax seems to believe that the Voynich is not a cipher but a language in odd or new script, with some word modifications reflecting grammar here and there (prefixes, infixes, suffixes). My question to him then would be why we notice certain patterns such as LAAFU etc which do not seem to reflect a natural language just written in a new script... But admittedly this is not my area of expertise: I think it would be really good to have the input of Emma May Smith for this type of question.
If he thinks these things (all of them, not just one or two) do coexist in a single natural language, I would like to know which one fits all of those criteria. Or does he deny the existence of these properties of the Voynich text?
-  Another question would revolve around his rather rare status as an academic and Voynich enthusiast, such as whether or not he has had the chance to discuss the Voynich with other academics, especially other linguists, and whether he has had any feedback from his linguist colleagues about his Voynich theories. After all his theory is one of the most widely publicized so I'd expect he's gotten at least some academic feedback.
-  Finally I think that there are some very valid questions in nickpelling's blogpost referenced above, in spite of the tone of the conversation. I think it would be interesting to reprise some of these questions, perhaps with a bit less vitriol... The fact that the two obviously have some bad blood doesn't make nickpelling's questions any less valid! I think it would be interesting to see how Bax addresses some of these questions. After all that blogpost is 3 years old now and perhaps Stephen Bax's views have evolve d on some of these points.

And finally, I'd like to add my opinion on these interviews in general:
Frankly I do not see the point of interviewing Voynicheros who have blogs, we can just ask them our questions ourselves in the comments sections of their blogs any day.
IMO the interviews' real value is to get some non-Voynich centric people to interview, perhaps retired academics from various fields (so they're less afraid of the impact on their careers) or at least people we don't usually hear a lot from, as you have done with Clemens... I'd love to hear an interview with Paula Zyats for example (although I think there might be some hard-hitting questions for her!)