RE: VMs: Voynich Information?

[Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi GC,

> I was referring to a permanent page that could be picked up by the search
> engines and be exposed "to the world" as an interesting "links"/index page
> for another project site.

From the number of hits you often get for the Wikipedia, it should be 
plain that being a Wiki is no obstacle to being crawled over by a search 
engine. :-)

And it *is* on your site, so a link to the front page from inside your site 
should suffice to get things picked up by plenty of spiders... :-)

> I'm watching your Wiki with interest, although I notice that it has no
> "overlord" that keeps blatant factual errors from creeping in.  Are you
> really certain you want me to write something there, considering how errant
> I've become in my middle age? :-)  Just kidding.

Wiki's are (by definition) overlord-less - the best case is when a Wiki 
develops a "tone", what you might call a "shared authorial voice". Check 
out some Wikipedia articles to see what I mean. :-)

> On your jargon page, you have a fairly incomplete description of
> code/cipher, and under Steganography, I'd like to see a steganographic
> system capable of emitting readable text that DOESN'T rely on mathematics as
> its distribution or "strewing" method (as Gustavus Selenus would say).  Even
> your examples of jpegs and wav's use complex algorithms for storage and
> extraction.

Well, you're perfectly free to edit any definitions you think are too 
narrow, just as much as anybody else is. Like I say, I'm only the spark 
plug here - once you start a Wiki, it's out of your hands. :-)

> I'd jump in an hit the "edit this page" button, but in things like
> definitions and other factual statements, I'd worry about how my
> interpretation might offend the original writer - which in this case would
> be - YOU! :-) And we all know how testy a Brit can get when he's
> offended...:-)  (Please don't take me seriously.)

The point about writing text on a Wiki is that - where you think it's wrong 
- you should try to find a way to capture these kinds of differences of 
opinion. That is, a Wiki definition shouldn't seek to capture the exact 
nuances of every property and object, but rather to describe a contested 
area - a cloud of opinion, rather than a point.

> Good concept anyway, Nick... and when you find some time, get it right, ok?

Everyone can contribute to a Wiki - I'm not a Wiki fascist by any means! 
Please help to get it right - it should take hardly any of your time. :-)

Cheers, .....Nick Pelling..... 


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list