[split] What can the structural peculiarities of the VMS tell us about the nature of the underlying text

[Jorge_Stolfi]

Natural languages did not need any algorithm in manuscripts

Sorry, by "trivial algorithm" I meant "if the next word fits in the current line, write it there, otherwise break a new line and write it there."  As discussed in that linked thread, this algorithm alone creates anomalous statistics (glyphs, digraphs, words, etc) over the first few words of each line.

The Scribe's "algorithm" was more complicated than that, since it apparently included the options of abbreviating certain words (like iin to m), stretching and shrinking spaces, etc.  And he may have done other things, like changing forms of glyphs at the start of the line.  It has not been shown yet that the line break anomalies cannot be explained as side effects of a non-trivial but plausible line-breaking "algorithm".

[Many medieval manuscripts broke words across lines without hyphens.] The fact that the VMS is different argues against a natural language.

I don't follow the logic.

Example: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.: no hyphens but syllables were not broken

Well, if the Scribe's previous experience with Latin had conditioned him to avoid splitting syllables, and he did not understand the Voynichese script, then he would have avoided splitting words on the VMS, since he could not tell where the syllable boundaries were. 

Or if he had been told by the Author that each Voynichese word was in fact a single syllable...

All the best, --stolfi