The methods devised by participants of g&b experiment can match Voynichese quite well (and seemingly better than any proposed languages), while not appearing to require more than simply writing words on a page. This is all in their article so I'm not sure what you mean about the gibberish generation being laborious.
You're correct that the act of copying an enciphered text would be like the copy scenario, so I supposeI am also thinking about the 'total time' to create. Any process requires putting words down on the page, so that provides a lower bound for anything, but a faithful copy further adds more time. So does any encipherment or actual information content.
All of course presupposes that the author and the scribe(s) are the same; if the scribes just copied then the difference is only if they did it sloppily or well. But copying a text you don't understand is already a bit of a weird proposition that I personally weigh much less than that the authors and scribes are the same. You may disagree, but it is still an interesting thing to think about under the assumption.
You're correct that the act of copying an enciphered text would be like the copy scenario, so I supposeI am also thinking about the 'total time' to create. Any process requires putting words down on the page, so that provides a lower bound for anything, but a faithful copy further adds more time. So does any encipherment or actual information content.
All of course presupposes that the author and the scribe(s) are the same; if the scribes just copied then the difference is only if they did it sloppily or well. But copying a text you don't understand is already a bit of a weird proposition that I personally weigh much less than that the authors and scribes are the same. You may disagree, but it is still an interesting thing to think about under the assumption.