Elephant in the Room Solution Considerations

[MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz)]

… Voynichese was definitely written from left to right …

I agree with that, too, … are clearly decorative -- or, worse, additions by late owners, like the colors and certain "enhancements" by BEEEPers.  

All the best, --stolfi

Congratulations, Jorge Stolfi. You have been omnipresent and have appeared to be assuming that AFAYK you are omniscient, and now have achieved omnipotence as far as the rules of this forum go. Almost there to being a god. What's the secret?

You have already figured it out. VM visuals are just decorations (done!) and you recently declared its text, in part, matched convincingly (to you) with another text, leading you to promise the rest of the text will be deciphered in due course.

I am not seeing any signs of you doing that, or perhaps I missed it, since I did not join this forum to study the Stolfi manuscript. Are your further findings about the text still in the pipeline? Should you not be working on that solution instead of distracting yourself (and me) in this thread?

So, what is the first paragraph, sentence, or word of the VM on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (or anywhere else other than those you already have solved in the recipe section) saying?

I stopped commenting in other threads fearing anything I say will be (understandably) misunderstood as advancing mine, but you seem to be cherishing it and pursuing it without impunity.

Even when someone offers something new, you just "agree" with it, as if you already knew, which is a sign of omnipotence, not acknowledgment, I think.

It is quite remarkable, by "agreeing" followed by a "but" you can advance your own decoration theory in other threads quite tactfully, distracting them from their work in the meantime. Two birds kissed at the same time. 

I did not even say anything about questioning the left to rightness of the text in the Voynich manuscript, generally speaking, but you had to attribute it to me and comment on it any way, when I already said in a post just prior to it that I am not caring about textual solutions at this time.

Is this a way of decorating your comments in a way that you advance your own theory in other threads in disguise? Interesting!

I have even seen you quoting AI, at length, in posts, presumably to show its errors, though they may also function as boasting that you were cited by it. Your statistical findings seem to bypass the slop bucket quite well!

What is this, a new intelligence, SI?