• Options
• Login
• Desktop Style

F70V1

• Index

  • The Voynich Ninja
  • Voynich Research
  • Theories & Solutions
  • F70V1
• F70V1

• RE: F70V1

  Koen G > 10 hours ago

  (10 hours ago)igajkgko Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There's a risk of a lot of "noise" from the latter, subjectively, given the number of theories and the number of people actually convinced by each theory (around one on average, I'd guess).

  
  Exactly.
  
  Also, when someone posts their theory here, I have the (perhaps naive) assumption that they want to hear feedback about their theory. If I don't monitor and encourage this, then we'll get an absolutely dystopian situation where everyone is just shouting their truth into the group like a bunch of kindergartners. 
  
  Imagine you make a thread about your solution, exploring the possibility that the manuscript is Danish, and you read "daiin" as "Dane". What would you prefer? 
  
  Scenario A: people ask questions about your theory and point out issues with it.
  
  OR
  
  Scenario B:
  - It's obviously Bulgarian though, -iin clearly stands for the definite article "-ta".
  - It can't be Danish because in myYyYyY solve there are no words, only feelings.
  - Well in myyyyy theory, the nymphs are Greek goddesses.
  - I read that word as "plant sap", just so you know, this might be helpful for you.
  
  If there is a need for a theorist playground where the latter behavior is fostered, that's fine by me though.

• RE: F70V1

  tavie > 9 hours ago

  In addition to all that, a solver posting on a thread on daiin's reduplication to say "actually daiin is dane!" or something of a similar can be confusing for new people who aren't yet able to tell the difference between the limited things we know about the VM and the myriad wrong solutions we have.   
   
  The rule has definitely made the forum better imo.  I don't think we need to change it.  Solvers have their own threads that they can use, e.g. the Danish solver can post in their own thread to say "That thread Koen created yesterday about how often daiin occurs next to another daiin proves my finding that it means 'dane'."
  
  I think there's a difference between theories that are solutions, and most theories that aren't solutions, e.g. that the text is meaningless.  It feels to me that it's easier for the latter to be found acceptably or borderline relevant to the topic.  Not sure why.  Maybe it's to do with how much the person seems committed to an objective debate. There does seem a difference to me between the "daiin = dane" example and someone saying "daiin daiin doesn't occur to this extent in natural language, so this would support the meaningless hypothesis."

• RE: F70V1

  Stefan Wirtz_2 > 8 hours ago

  (24-07-2025, 10:12 PM)takrobat Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[..]
  The original roman calendar also had 10 months, but they had 304 days in the year [..]

  
  wot?
  
  As far as can be found, the Romans were related to an etruscian moon-oriented calendar with 12 months and 354 days from their beginning, enhanced it to 355 and initially started at March 1st, but this all was reformed later by J. Caesar. 
  What kind of Wiki is this?
  
  Some ancient roman authors and politicians made a mess with "10 months" but this is highly doubted as they may got confused with the shift of december -->12th month etc. Real mentionings of roman calenders happened in ~2nd century BC first, so the previous time remained in quite a darkness, which is not proving much.
  
  About 5/10; this appears for both "Aberil" and "May" sheets, but I wouldn't try to deduct any meaning from that.
  
  At all, the calendar version with 12 months and 355+ days came up at least 1,400 years before writing of VMS and was clearly a standard in Europe, several other cultures were even more exact with their calendars.
• Next Oldest Next Newest