(17-09-2017, 09:47 PM)davidjackson wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I don't think the questions make sense. If we agree it's a one-to-one code, then it's not a natural language; and so the fourth answer makes no sense.
And the third option doesn't gell with your explanation - it should read more like "underlying natural language with anagram code obfuscation" or something. It's fine saying
Quote:I would like to restrict this poll to substitution codes that do not involve transpositions (in other words, this poll is not asking about solutions that involve changing relofw into flower).But if you don't give those who think this is the answer an opportunity to vote, you're skewing the result.
1. By substitution code, I mean that the VMS glyphs are substituted for letters (or groups of letters) in a natural language.
2. Adding transposition to the question makes it too complex. One then has to consider one-to-one substitution with transposition, one-to-many substitution with transposition, no substitution with transposition. I really think it would be better to deal with tansposition separately.
If there are people who think it's a substitution code with transposition (or some other kind of code with transposition) then they can abstain or suggest another poll (or suggest better wording for this poll, but I can't see a way to do it without adding at least three more options and I'm not sure that would work).