Discussion of "A possible generating algorithm of the Voynich manuscript"

[ReneZ]

René, you are so convinced that the self-citation method must be wrong that you reject anything I say. It even doesn't matter why you reject it.
 
You didn't bother to use the search function at the top of this page to search for the term 'small changes'. You also also didn't bother to check the details of Pellings You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. about my app or to take my You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. or even your You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. into account.

Torsten, yes, I think that the self-citation method does not adequately explain the text in the Voynich MS, and I am also convinced that this is not 'how it was done'. 

That is my opinion of course, just like your opinion is the opposite.
However, like you, I do my best to explain on what my opinion is based.

The many statistics that are used are of course not opinions. These are reproducible data.

I may have introduced the term 'small changes' myself, but it has also been used by Emma, whose opinions expressed near the start of this thread coincide in many respects with mine.
I think that this terminology is not essential to the discussion.

By the way, I am happy that you posted the link to your github area, because it includes many plots I wanted to see again, but I did not know where to look.