Rosettes and Revelations Pt.1: The Holy City - Koen Gheuens and Cary Rapaport

[ReneZ]

In my opinion, it is good that providing more detail makes a theory more susceptible to criticism. A theory should be subject to criticism as much specific criticism as possible. Theories should be challenged at every point and every detail and every argument to see how strong they really are. A theory may on the whole be good, but even then some details may be wrong and need to be correct or challenged. If others don't challenge a theory it is the obligation of the theorist to perform this process of challenge and counter-argument to their own theory.

It is a grueling and painful process having one's theory criticised, but it is precisely necessary to do so.

So I would reiterate that in my opinion:

It is "fortunately" a fact that providing more details makes any proposal more susceptible to criticism.

I was not specifically writing about proposals for Voynich MS explanations, but more about competitive proposals. However, that could also be made to apply here.
After all, Voynich MS explanation proposals can be considered to be competitive.

In any case, the use of "fortunately" here is mostly hypothetical.
It is extremely rare in the world of Voynich theories to see people reacting positively to negative criticism.
The people who are capable of that tend not to propose unverifiable statements in the first place.