The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against

[Jorge_Stolfi]

To specify where and when the book was recorded, how the author came across the source material, what the source material looked like, how the writing system was designed

But the Author knew all those things by heart. 

and definitely some word correspondences for any special terms of the source language that the author learned during the recording session

If the author learned any of them during the recording section.  

• [In "Chinese":] "Sorry, what was that word you just said?"
  
• "Má huáng"?
  
• "Yes, what does it mean?"
  
• "Well, it means má huáng.  You know, the herb."
  
• "What does it look like?"
  
• "Uh, I have never seen it. I buy it as flakes from the apothecary."
  
• "How would you specify it for an European reader?"
  
• "I am not sure, but I have a hunch that 300 years from now some guy over there will name it Ephedra sinica."
  
• "Okay.  Let me note that down on page 1..."
  

Seriously, if the Author did create a glossary, it would probably have been a separate booklet, that he could consult while reading the VMS. 

not include any plaintext notes in the final codex and use a custom system of writing, that effectively makes the final codex enciphered

Well, yes, one can say that using a foreign language is a form of encryption.  

In fact, a natural language that one does not know is the strongest form of encryption there is.  Much harder to crack than Vigenère, Enigma, Purple Code, even codebook ciphers...  And yet very easy to write and read, for those who speak the language.

the whole Chinese theory is just a complicated way of explaining why we can't decipher it yet

It is much more than that.  The COT proposes a specific set of languages, a specific type of "encryption", and definite clues about the nature of the contents.  Possibly even the identity of some source texts.

But may I ask what is your preferred theory about the VMS?

All the best, --stolfi