It is sort of interesting that it is a group work. It’s odd that somebody would scribble a whole journal full of random stuff, but of course people in the olden days got bored too. Convincing four other people to scribble with you seems a bit harder, haha.

Now that we have GenAI a whole book of random stuff is cheap, but back then it was expensive (and coordinating a group sounds even more expensive!), so we assume it must've had some meaning to someone, and get nerd-sniped into finding a reading.

(on the other hand: https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1418.html . It's amusing to see "errata"!)

Check this out: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/

(I had no idea this lore exist but got interested why my daughter suddenly started to talk about `scp`, I was wondering is she wants to copy some files between machines...)

how do they rule out if these five hands come from the same person with long periods of not working on the script? My handwriting can certainly change when I take a three year break

Answered in the article:

In certain places, the script was more cramped or more likely to slant as it crossed the page. She tested this observation by picking a letter that didn’t appear often and tracking it across the manuscript’s pages. Its style, she saw, varied among groups of pages but not within those groups. This suggested that the differences—larger or smaller loops, straighter or curvier crossbars, longer or shorter feet—were the product of different scribes rather than of one scribe writing the same letter in different ways.

To reduce the possibility of selection bias, Davis examined other letters and found that their styles shifted in lockstep with the first letter. After months of analysis, she concluded that even if the Voynich had a single guiding vision, it was the handiwork of five different scribes.

>Since then, a fair number of serious researchers have done work on the Manuscript. So far, their conclusions are similarly dull and limited. (Though they do rule out many cool categories of nut theories.)

Not limited enough to rule some things out. Kind of "We're just guessing, but their guesses are incorrect. We do know that much".

>'Till ~2020, Voynich research was pretty much reserved for nut jobs, and the very occasional academic intent upon career suicide.

I wouldn't say that. Probably the most famous Voynich researcher until modern times was William Friedman, who was a famous cryptographer who led the team who cracked PURPLE (Japan's equivalent to Enigma) in WWII. He wasn't viewed as a crackpot but was and is revered in the field of cryptography.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Friedman