Bad news: f116v was substantially mangled by Retracer

[oshfdk]

I understand the reluctance, since there is no middle option: either there was no retracing, or a large fraction of the text (near 100% on some pages) was carefully but still visibly retraced, a long time after it was written -- because the original ink was fading towards invisibility.  

Is there any practical difference between the retracing hypothesis and the idea that the manuscript is an imperfect copy made by someone who didn't know the original language or script, hence full of mistakes?