24-11-2018, 09:00 PM
It's important to look at the objectives of holding a conference. I've heard two different ideas: one is to interest academic researchers, the other to provide a forum for discussion of existing research. I don't think either of those objectives will be fulfilled by a conference at this stage.
A conference would only be of interest to academics if they were already interested in the Voynich manuscript. The conference would give them the chance to present and discuss their research. Even though a formal conference might make academics more willing to come forward if they are researching, the issue is really getting them over that initial hurdle of beginning research.
A conference to discuss existing amateur research (us, basically) would be potentially worthwhile as research is currently not good enough (I'm to blame as much as anybody). But I feel that a conference would be expensive and time-consuming to arrange, and for a group of amateurs it could only ever be a very irregular meeting.
The Voynich 100 Conference is a good example of these two points: yes, some academics are interested in the Voynich manuscript, but there's still not a great deal of engagement with the amateur research community; and, as Rene has remarked, a repeat conference hasn't been possible.
I feel that the two objectives could be better met in another way: a 'soft' journal for amateur research. It would allow the community to filter the best of the existing amateur research, presenting our 'best face' to academics/professionals. It would further build a repository for amateur research, allowing more orderly referencing and discussion of that research. There would be no need for the journal to be regularly nor physically published, just an 'as and when' publication released as a PDF. Researchers could submit themselves or be approached by the journal.
I would be willing to put a journal together (setting and layout) if there were 3 or 4 other people willing to select articles/papers.
A conference would only be of interest to academics if they were already interested in the Voynich manuscript. The conference would give them the chance to present and discuss their research. Even though a formal conference might make academics more willing to come forward if they are researching, the issue is really getting them over that initial hurdle of beginning research.
A conference to discuss existing amateur research (us, basically) would be potentially worthwhile as research is currently not good enough (I'm to blame as much as anybody). But I feel that a conference would be expensive and time-consuming to arrange, and for a group of amateurs it could only ever be a very irregular meeting.
The Voynich 100 Conference is a good example of these two points: yes, some academics are interested in the Voynich manuscript, but there's still not a great deal of engagement with the amateur research community; and, as Rene has remarked, a repeat conference hasn't been possible.
I feel that the two objectives could be better met in another way: a 'soft' journal for amateur research. It would allow the community to filter the best of the existing amateur research, presenting our 'best face' to academics/professionals. It would further build a repository for amateur research, allowing more orderly referencing and discussion of that research. There would be no need for the journal to be regularly nor physically published, just an 'as and when' publication released as a PDF. Researchers could submit themselves or be approached by the journal.
I would be willing to put a journal together (setting and layout) if there were 3 or 4 other people willing to select articles/papers.