Cvetka's Slovenian Theory Thread

[Stefan Wirtz_2]

[..]
I'm also going to start with a few assumptions.
1a  The Voynich Manuscript really was created in the early 15th century (radiocarbon dating between 1404 and 1438).  It is not a 20th century forgery by Wilfrid Voynich.
1b  The Voynich Manuscript was created in Europe.
2   More than one person was involved in the creation of the Voynich Manuscript.  This touches on the "means" part of the mystery.  Aside from the claims of multiple scribes, I don't see a single monk hiding in his room having the "means" to create such a manuscript. 
3a  The people who created the Voynich Manuscript were not trying to hide information.  They were trying to share information.  They were trying to educate.
3b  The Voynich Manuscript was created as a legitimate attempt to communicate information that the creators thought was important to preserve and share.  It was not created as a joke or a hoax or a mystical scam or a secret cipher.
3c  The Voynich Manuscript was written in an actual living (of that time) European language, not a constructed language, but only a constructed (non-Latin) alphabet.  Sort of like Star Wars Aurebesh is used to write English words to make them look Star Wars-ish but with the goal to educate, not entertain.
4  The language of the Voynich Manuscript is not Latin.  This touches on the "motive" part of the mystery.  Who in Europe in the early 15th century had "motive" to write in a language other than Latin in a time when "everybody" in Europe used Latin?
[..]

To this point, the best comprehension I've seen in this forum so far -- even if those are "just" assumptions...

[..]
I think the overall consensus here is that even this degree of mangling won't be enough to decrease h2 down to Voynich levels (recall that h2 measures not just regularities in prefixes/endings, but also regularities in the roots, which are more "random" in Slavic languages), but it would be interesting to actually check.

Those entropy calculations are still very depending upon the type of transliteration;
some more aggressive "experts" here are favourizing an "h2" of 2.3 for Voynichese, while the change of transliteration file can produce a value of ~2.9.
Old Church Slavonic is said to have high h0 and h1, but an "h2" of just 2.5-2.85 , due to harsh restrictions for syllables' endings and several abbreviations.
OCS is considered as a structural relative of VMS -- maybe they are distanced cousins.
So which consensus?