- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
- Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
-
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
Scarecrow > 04-04-2024, 06:55 AM
-
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
Anton > 04-04-2024, 08:38 PM
(03-04-2024, 08:33 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Then it could be this post by ReneZ: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Definitely not that one, because it's listed as unread for me.
And not
Quote:You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
for the same reason.
Yes, maybe the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by farmerjohn is relevant to what I mean, I think that maybe it stems from that very discussion. Maybe just deja vu, as I suggested
From the several references that you quote it's evident that the subject pops up now and then. -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
merrimacga > 05-04-2024, 10:27 AM
Here is the date order on the suggested threads/posts suggested not yet rejected as the one Anton may have been remembering (this thread, Anton's posts You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., also Scarecrow's post You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.):
08-11-2017, Koen, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(Anton read and responded to this one in 2017 but Rene never posted in it.)
27-03-2019, farmerjohn, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(It quotes Rene's test but no one posted responses to it.)
04-12-2021, Mark Knowles, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. in the same thread
(This is a lengthy one. There are also two potentially related threads noted at the bottom of it below the new reply fields. I will mention one of these below. Rene responded to it multiple times but this is probably not the one Anton was thinking of and he didn't post to it himself.)
In his thread above, I think Koen may have been referring to Rene's thread below. It is also one of the two related threads noted below Mark's thread.
12-08-2017, Rene, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I always think it is helpful to refer back to what has been written before, no matter how far back it goes. However, at least some VM researchers do tend to re-think periodically and the oldest postings may no longer hold valid and/or relevant information. If the oldest postings are simply rehashed and quoted, rather than updated or obsoleted, then they are possibly still relevant and worth continued reference.
Still, I think I would prefer to reference Rene's Voynich.nu site instead of the above post. Here are the pages relevant to this post, along with their last date of update (from the bottom of each page):
20/02/2024, Epilogue (part 1), You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
20/02/2019, Epilogue (part 2), You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
Anton > 05-04-2024, 10:33 PM
Darn, I found what I was trying to recollect:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Not exactly what you may have expected from my description, but anyway.
Thanks nablator and merrimacga for the search efforts, I think that with due patience the results of all those discussions may probably be summed up to harmonize a good checklist that would serve the goal suggested by Koen. -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
Anton > 05-04-2024, 10:43 PM
(01-04-2024, 08:49 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Or do you think a thread like this would be a waste of time and have no effect at all on the mind still high on the sword in the stone syndrome?
Addressing this question, I think that a well-harmonized list definitely won't be a waste of time. Not because it will have a strong effect on the "I solved it" type of researchers (it won't), but rather because it would help third-party observers (like forum readers or perhaps even press/media, if this list happens to be widely cited, e.g. included in the Wikipedia page) to quickly filter out invalid solutions. -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
oshfdk > 28-03-2025, 12:08 PM
(01-04-2024, 11:31 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I've thought before that we should play theorist bingo. We each get a differently arrange board and the first one to get a line wins.
But then I remember I'm a moderator and I probably shouldn't encourage this kind of thing :p
If this hasn't been done yet, here's my humble offering:
Anything missing? Any corrections? -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
Bluetoes101 > 28-03-2025, 02:14 PM
Feel like the "mirror effect" is pretty strong too, probably needs to be on there.
As in, wherever the MS can reflect the solver, it does... -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
oshfdk > 28-03-2025, 02:18 PM
(28-03-2025, 02:14 PM)Bluetoes101 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Feel like the "mirror effect" is pretty strong too, probably needs to be on there.
As in, wherever the MS can reflect the solver, it does...
Isn't it similar to "When I first saw it I immediately recognized..."? If you are talking about how some people find a couple of what seems like familiar elements in the MS and get stuck pulling on that thread forever. -
RE: Should we have a thread to refer theorists to?
tavie > 28-03-2025, 02:55 PM
"It can't be a coincidence!"