A One-Page Ledger Method for Generating Voynich-Like Text

[Dunsel]

When you claim the tokens in fv1 are the product of such and such a process, you are no longer claiming to have modeled them. You are claiming to know as a matter of historical fact what the scribe did. This is an extremely strong claim for the banal reason that it's hard to prove what someone did 600 years ago, but there are several other factors that make inferring from the model hard.

I have stated repeatedly in these posts that I am not claiming a solution. I'm simply trying to present facts and data as I have discovered them. Do I think copy/mutate is viable? Very much so. If I have made any claims of a solution then I apologize. It's really hard to parse my words in these posts so that misinterpretation isn't instant. You can see what success I'm having at that.

Again:

I MAKE NO CLAIM THAT I HAVE A SOLUTION! I have evidence for a possible method. Does this exclude any other possible explanation? Other than perhaps that it was a secret document conjured up by the CIA, no, it does not. If in the past or in the future I seem to be making some claim to a solution or historical fact then it's a mis-wording.

A genuine path forward for these models would be to show that they depend less on the Voynich's summary statistics. Your analysis of the gallows letters, which I do not believe is shared by Timm and Schinner's model, is a case in point. 
...
If that's all there is to it, it may be the best we can do is say that their process had a bias towards gallows in line start words and we may not be able to formally separate premise (we observe the bias) from conclusion (it is a product of an arbitrary choice).

Right now, I'm simply stripping gallows to see if there's an underlying structure. Am I treating them as being decorative? Yes. Is that what I believe? Perhaps. Is this work proof of such? Far from it. But the tests I've run are showing that if gallows are stripped, there's still underlying word families associated with them.

By the by, if you are in fact "reproducing" the Voynich, failure to incorporate Currier's curve-line system observations and similar analyses seems like fair game to me. It also strikes me as the kind of "observable orthographic structure" you say the model addresses in in 7.6 of your paper. This is largely an aside to the main point here, which is that I don't think you're proving your interpretation, but I'm not clear why statistics about letter bases are not part of the orthographic structures in the Voynich.

Yes, that's orthographic structure. No, I haven't modeled it yet. I had this objection about CLS earlier. No, I'm not modelling it either. Failure to model those does not invalidate the copy/mutate + ledger results or the source sheet evidence I've presented.  At most, it suggests that if copy/mutate is a viable explanation, there may be additional constraints operating on the mutation process that still need to be identified.