17-11-2018, 11:16 AM
(This post was last modified: 17-11-2018, 11:28 AM by VViews.
Edit Reason: added link
)
I really don't understand the point of all this.
There already is a subforum called "History and Provenance", as davidjackson said. If the goal is to get the questions answered, then go ahead and start the threads. Creating a new subforum will not change the quality of the discussion of a given subject. I'll add that describing the current History and Provenance forum as "propagandist literature" is a really far-out concept.
As for Stolfi, I have never seen anything disparaging written about him, so I don't understand what this crusade to "restore his character" is about; if it is something that happened years ago on another platform, I don't see what it has to do with this forum. Whatever it may have been has passed long ago, and all that remains is his website and his contributions to the earlier mailing list, which each of us can read for what they are. Personally I have enjoyed visiting his website.
And I agree with Searcher of course that disagreement and critique can play a positive role (I can't speak for Searcher but I believe the "mercantile" comment had to do with the fact that OP said at one point that she was coming out with a book, and that negative replies to her posts would go against her and her publisher's commercial interests, see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ).
I think that each person will read the work that has been done in the past, or choose not to read it, and make up their own mind. I don't see how any of the above ranting and rambling is actually helpful: it seems to me to be more about seeking to control a narrative than about furthering our understanding of the Voynich Manuscript.
There already is a subforum called "History and Provenance", as davidjackson said. If the goal is to get the questions answered, then go ahead and start the threads. Creating a new subforum will not change the quality of the discussion of a given subject. I'll add that describing the current History and Provenance forum as "propagandist literature" is a really far-out concept.
As for Stolfi, I have never seen anything disparaging written about him, so I don't understand what this crusade to "restore his character" is about; if it is something that happened years ago on another platform, I don't see what it has to do with this forum. Whatever it may have been has passed long ago, and all that remains is his website and his contributions to the earlier mailing list, which each of us can read for what they are. Personally I have enjoyed visiting his website.
And I agree with Searcher of course that disagreement and critique can play a positive role (I can't speak for Searcher but I believe the "mercantile" comment had to do with the fact that OP said at one point that she was coming out with a book, and that negative replies to her posts would go against her and her publisher's commercial interests, see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ).
I think that each person will read the work that has been done in the past, or choose not to read it, and make up their own mind. I don't see how any of the above ranting and rambling is actually helpful: it seems to me to be more about seeking to control a narrative than about furthering our understanding of the Voynich Manuscript.