[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: VMs: Image Source, Accuracy of Transcriptions


Thanks for the kind word, and "disagreement" in its essence is the very
heart of what makes cooperation such a useful tool in problem solving.  I
have for the most part attempted to hold back any comments that would tend
to dissuade list members from following their own course, and I haven't
attempted to wave my own flag.  That would be crude, and without proof,
simply an attempt at grand-standing, an action most commonly associated with
those who would perpetrate a "fraud" on others for their own gain.

Nevertheless, I must reiterate a point I've made so many times, and I do
this because I know it has direct bearing on the case of the VMS, not
because I simply suspect that this view is the correct one to take.
Transcription approach makes a big difference on what you're able to see in
the VMS.  Jacques and others think it doesn't, but consider, only
hypothetically if you doubt, that the VMS is cipher.  Ciphers of this time
are driven by place and position, and to be even one character off is to be
out of synch with the system, throwing off all your efforts to decipher.
Using some of the transcriptions available, you'd be off by up to 7
characters in any given line.  Using Currier, you're closer to the real
thing, being off only very rarely, though you might not have the most
accurate rendition of a glyph available for that particular position.

Currier is enough to gain the initial line statistics necessary to come up
with a scheme, I say this from experience.  You will be forced to modify
Currier a bit to account for certain anomalies and connectivity not
accounted for in other transcriptions, but Currier does well as a starting

Notice here that my motives in asking others to revert to other forms of
transcription apart from EVA has nothing to do with the promotion of my
personal transcription scheme, VGBT.  This transcription scheme is a couple
of years beyond any of you at present, and while I seek to encode only what
is on parchment, it's purpose for me is to determine how the various
shorthand markings play on the system I already know to be present.  It was
begun to examine nuances that may or may not have an effect on the system at
hand, and is therefore somewhat misunderstood.  It is an extension of the
Currier glyph-set, but it does not offer to the un-initiated any hint of why
the glyphs are connected or disemboweled in their fashion.  Don't use this
transcription, but don't lose track of it, as it will answer some important
questions in the future.

I have no other ambition in mind than the solution of the VMS when I make
these statements, and I certainly wouldn't want to try to change anyone's
heart-felt opinion.  A few are looking for the answer, and others are
playing on the sidelines, rooting for one section or another.  Some are
simply playing the odds.  Choose your team and root, or jump in with both
feet.  So far I'm a team of one, but that will most certainly change in the
near future, I promise.  In fact, in the last few days I've become somewhat
generous in my outlook.  Are you a player or an observer, Larry?  If you're
a player, contact me.  We have much to discuss.


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