[Blog Post] Was the Voynich text generated by using the self-citation-method?

[Emma May Smith]

My objection to Timm's theory is essentially the same as before: any writer needs to adhere to a set of rules in the creation or alteration of words. Without them many patterns in the text would not appear. The writer in Timm's theory could have written words with any structure whatsoever, yet they quite consistently kept to the same structure. And it's not enough for his theory to simply state that rules exist and model them into the output. They must be described and explained: what are the rules and why do they exist?

It is not the case, as the article believes, that Timm's theory is rejected for being unsatisfying on a human level, but because it's incomplete on an explanatory level.