1 Does the text contain any meaning? YES, but I am much less sure about this than I used to be. Timm and Schinner are having a considerable impact on my views. Also, the idea of glossolalia put forward by Geoffrey on this forum is something that has opened new perspectives of meaninglessness to me.
2 Has the text been purposefully enciphered to conceal its meaning? NO, but Rene's "mod_2" cipher seems to me one of the important new things of 2019. It makes the "cipher" idea more understandable to me, but I am not convinced. In particular, I believe there are features that suggest that Voynichese is a phonetic script (e.g. what Emma and I discussed in our paper, Jacques Guy 1991 Sukhotin paper).
3 Do the images match the text? YES, why not? Until we can read the text and prove the contrary, this is the simplest assumption. Unless the text is meaningless...
4 Are the plants meant to refer to real plants? YES - something that changed my views in recent years is Rene's posting about Trinity ms O.2.48. I believe this is in several respects the herbal that comes closer to the VMS. I believe the plants in the "three names" Trinity herbal derive from real plants, though the illustrations are unreliable and the plants cannot be identified.
5 Is the majority of the plants exotic from a European perspective (Asian, African, American...)? NO (but I believe the herbal text could be non-European, as possibly is the case also for the Trinity "three names" herbal)
6 Have the images been made ambiguous or otherwise strange to conceal their true meaning? NO - there are several manuscripts with puzzling illustrations, but this is because the concepts they illustrate are different from the modern way of thinking.
7 Is alchemy an important part of the manuscript? NO, with some doubts about Quire 13.
8 Is astronomy and/or astrology an important part of the MS? YES: by this I mean that it is a recognizable theme in the illustrations. I don't mean it is the main subject of the whole ms.
9 Is medicine an important part of the MS? YES: this is what plants, astral bodies, part of plants and jars could have in common. Bathing would also be consistent, but it is less clear that the bathing women are not entirely allegorical.
10 Is the MS the creative product of one mind, i.e. an author? (Taking into account the possibility that one or more scribes helped to fashion the physical manuscript) YES, but I am far from sure.
11 Is the MS authored by a known historical figure? NO
12 Will we ever be able to read the MS? YES (but since I am not sure about 1, who knows?)
13 Will there be any breakthrough in Voynich studies in 2020? NO - this field moves forward by small steps.
14 Is the MS any kind of hoax? NO. Discovering the Angelic Languages by Dee and Kelley also changed my views. The VMS could be something similar and I don't see their work as a hoax (though some believe Kelley was an impostor). At least the first of the two languages (Loagaeth) appears to be meaningless and phonetic, quite close to glossolalia. The second one (Enochian) could be even more interesting, being a messy pseudo-linguistic unconscious parody of English. Also relevant about the cipher idea (point 2): Dee and Kelley created their own alphabet, but its goal was not concealing the meaning of their mostly meaningless text.
15 Have (part of) your views about the MS changed notably over the last few years? YES (see 1, 2, 4, 14).