I think this "foreshadowing" was misdirection. The biggest argument against Silviana is that Sanderson would not have questioned whether we have seen Mesaana's persona. He could not have forgotten Silviana, so she can't be Mesaana.
Mesaana == Silviana ...
- 19/11/2009 10:34:45 PM
1203 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM*
- 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM
301 Views
That's not how speculation works.
- 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM
823 Views
Sadly, there are a lot of idiots around here who do exactly what this person did. *NM*
- 20/11/2009 02:02:34 AM
257 Views
Settle down there, tom. Not everyone shares your obviously superior intellect.
- 20/11/2009 03:05:44 AM
698 Views
Yes. It is.
- 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM
642 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason.
- 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM
583 Views
Let me guess
- 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM
743 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but...
- 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM
791 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test
- 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM
626 Views
I need to bump this so Rand == Rand doesn't look so spammy. I only post quality content. *NM*
- 20/11/2009 07:38:32 AM
265 Views

. *NM*