- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
We need a list of useful Voynich research
- We need a list of useful Voynich research
-
We need a list of useful Voynich research
Koen G > Yesterday, 02:04 PM
I've been thinking about it for a while, and it feels more and more appropriate that we, as a community of Voynich researchers, collect and maintain a list of links to useful Voynich research, articles, resources etc. This would address a whole range of problems:
1) I keep hearing from people (e.g. commenters on my videos) that they would like to read more, but find the field overwhelming. Like it or not, but there's a lot of theorist drivel among Voynich writings, and newcomers lack the context to judge these. Keep in mind that Cheshire was published in a peer reviewed journal, and outlets like academia.edu further muddy the waters.
2) It has happened more times than I dare to admit that I've been looking into a topic, only to find out much later that Nick Pelling already wrote about it when I was still in high school. Yes, I know, google is your friend, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for more convenience for all. Some of the actual good research is genuinely hard to find. Tucked away in some blog post or an ancient, dilapidated website... For example, I know that Julian Bunn wrote some good things about statistics, but I don't remember what exactly. If I had an overview with links and a very brief description of the contents, I would probably make more use of these
How to proceed?
I am willing to maintain the list in the curated threads section, but it would have to be a group effort. I propose that if you have published something that should be on the list, you start by submitting your own research. A link and one or two lines of explanation. You know the best what you have written, so you're the one who's best placed to add your stuff.
The bulk of the list will of course be things written by people who aren't active here, which we can add gradually, whenever you think of it or come across it.
We will need a way to decide what should and should not be on the list, without fights emerging. A list we maintain implies that we believe the research is good, or at least worth reading for someone interested in the topic at hand. How do we determine this?
A first filter should be: no text solutions. We have separate list for those.
But what if someone submits something that's not a solution, but still so bad and flawed that I cannot in good conscience encourage people to read it? I would really see this activity as a service to researchers and newcomers alike, to help people see the forest through the trees. Part of that service is us using our experience to select the pieces of research that are most useful or informative about various categories.
There has to be some curating involved. How can we do this? I'd like to have some system figured out before we start.
So I'd like to hear your ideas, and if there are enough people interested in this to make it work. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
bi3mw > Yesterday, 02:43 PM
The biggest problem I see is deciding what should and shouldn't go on the list. Creating a poll every time seems too time-consuming to me. Perhaps this could be solved using the "Thank - you - system". If a publication receives a certain minimum number of "likes" it will be added to the list, otherwise not. - Just an idea. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
oshfdk > Yesterday, 02:48 PM
I think "useful" is subjective, but there can be a list of most cited research. Like any paper, blog post or thread linked to from at least 10 (30, 50) different threads on Voynich Ninja will qualify. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
Koen G > Yesterday, 03:10 PM
(Yesterday, 02:43 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The biggest problem I see is deciding what should and shouldn't go on the list. Creating a poll every time seems too time-consuming to me. Perhaps this could be solved using the "Thank - you - system". If a publication receives a certain minimum number of "likes" it will be added to the list, otherwise not. - Just an idea.
This might work if enough people are committed.
Oshfdk: I'm not sure if we can just go by quantity. Some topics are more known than others, but that doesn't make the forgotten older (or newer) research any less valuable for the list. One of the several purposed would exactly be to revalue forgotten research. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
RadioFM > Yesterday, 03:14 PM
Great idea
I think it'd be nice to not only include single posts and publications, but also leave a "Useful links" section listing blogs (e.g. voynich.nu's homepage).
Also, since this curated post will be one of the first threads newcomers are encouraged to read, could we maybe put a big warning or text in red at the top suggesting would-be decipherers to read the curated material? I think the solveritis and AI solutions will only get worse unless we put some flashy neon sign reading "No, you haven't cracked it. This is why" and refer them to our curated bibliography. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
oshfdk > Yesterday, 03:36 PM
(Yesterday, 03:10 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Oshfdk: I'm not sure if we can just go by quantity. Some topics are more known than others, but that doesn't make the forgotten older (or newer) research any less valuable for the list. One of the several purposed would exactly be to revalue forgotten research.
I was just thinking about any objective way that would reduce the possibility of fighting about what to include and what not to include and at the same time reflect some consensus of voynich.ninja community.
Personally, I find voynich.nu quite satisfactory main reference point for practical purposes. I'm not sure creating a separate reading list would be helpful for newcomers: I think, most people come to Voynich Manuscript to have some fun, some Dan Brown role-play, enjoy the mystery and have a crack at it. I don't think they would do pre-class reading even if there was a list for that. I don't see any issue with that. While people who are willing to spend significant time and effort likely will be able to discover past research by themselves.
What would be a good example of forgotten research that you think should be on the list? -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
bi3mw > Yesterday, 03:47 PM
(Yesterday, 03:36 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What would be a good example of forgotten research that you think should be on the list?
Just to make a start:
On the VMS Word Length Distribution
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
In my opinion, this is a fundamental observation. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
oshfdk > Yesterday, 04:03 PM
(Yesterday, 03:47 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Just to make a start:
On the VMS Word Length Distribution
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
In my opinion, this is a fundamental observation.
I don't think this one is forgotten in any way. This article was mentioned on Voynich Ninja at least 4 times in the past 12 months, the most recent in September last year in this thread: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
And overall there are well over 10 mentions.
It is also mentioned on voynich.nu at least on this page: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
MarcoP > Yesterday, 04:17 PM
For Voynich.nu, I wonder if it would be best to link to individual pages/sections (though the problem is that there are tens of pages that are extremely useful).
Two more resources I often suggest to newcomers are:
- Claire L. Bowern and Luke Lindemann, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., 2021.
- Mary D’Imperio, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., 1978. In some respects, this is still a great introduction to the Voynich manuscript. In other respects, it is obviously outdated (e.g. no carbon-dating at the time, no awareness of the Crossbow-Sagittarius tradition). I wish there were an “updated edition” so that it could complement Bowern and Lindemann’s discussion of the text. Can this be replaced by anything more recent?
- Claire L. Bowern and Luke Lindemann, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., 2021.
-
RE: We need a list of useful Voynich research
bi3mw > Yesterday, 04:30 PM
@oshfdk: With appropriate effort in the search, much can certainly be found again (provided you know what you are looking for). But this is exactly where the reader should be helped.