[Panel Session] Cryptologic History panel Oct. 19, 2017

[ReneZ]

There's a fundamental problem that makes discussions about the Voynich MS difficult.
This is that it is scattered over many discussion boards and personal blogs.

I understood from the moderator team here that they tend to agree with the good rule of not dragging issues from forum X into forum Y (in this case here). However, in practice this is not really possible to enforce.

Different people read different (combinations of) fora, and the many relative newcomers have only been able to read a fairly recent fraction of the historical discussions.

Most of the points in Rich's contributions in this thread refer to past discussions in other fora. When Rich writes:

most others on that list, and in the other facets of my argument, are, and get ignored. Their are many arguments which, alone, condemn the Voynich as a forgery, but remain unaddressed, or improperly and incompletely addressed at best. I believe one or two of them are enough to make a firm case... and yet are left to stand around like elephants in the room.

then almost nobody here can properly judge this. All these points have been discussed ad nauseam in the 'mailing list'. To the point that I decided to leave it since there was no point in discussing them further.
I may also refer to Helmut's post You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.  . 

If, initially, I thought that Rich referred to the Beinecke's reluctance to show the manuscript, then this is because he has already complained about this in the past. Access to the MS has been severely reduced by the Beinecke since 2009.
Other complaints have included that the report of the radio-carbon dating has supposedly not been published.
Of the McCrone report, only a summary has been published, and this report fails to mention the highly suspicious (according to Rich's recent presentation) appearance of some chemicals that supposedly betray a modern fake.

Now, for me, these are the ingredients of a conspiracy theory. Several different parties are collaborating in hiding information. I don't see why I should apologise for pointing it out.
Anyway, this too is old material from another forum.

Back to the first lines of this post.
The scattering of information over several fora, including parallel discussions about the same topics, is one of the main reasons why I am reducing my active participation. I simply don't have the time for it, and it brings very little.