History of the study

[davidjackson]

Diane, you are proposing a sociographical study upon Voynich researchers. And I am not sure with what purpose. Frankly, IMHO, 90% of the stuff would be gossip, rumour and hearsay.
Sociographical research relating to living people and recent memory is not conducted amongst amateurs (no matter how talented) in an open forum.
For example, your proposed question:

Q: Given that Jacques Guy publicly admitted his hoax, and in the same article to the Times Educational Supplement that he could find no flaw in Stolfi's statistics and conclusions, why was Stolfi driven from the study ad.hominem?

And what happens if Prof's Guy or Stolfi come across the lot of us blathering on about their professional careers in an uninformed manner? All it would do is bring the forum into disrepute, and I cannot see that it would advance Voynich studies one jot.

If you want to run a gossip mag on Voynich researchers, feel free. On this forum, please concentrate upon real Voynich research.

This means you can discuss other people's research. What you can't do is opine upon why someone, living or dead, exited the stage left, pursued by a bear.

We have a history forum, and such questions and discussions can be posted there.

Look around, JKP.  Where's Pelling? Where's Don? Where's Sam G.?   Where are...  all the other independent minds.

Well, at least one of them left the forum partly because you kept on annoying them. Less said about that, the better.