Active Users:1553 Time:26/09/2026 10:53:51 AM
Fails the Sanderson confusion test Asha'man Warder Send a noteboard - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM
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.
Reply to message
Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 10:34:45 PM 1288 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 361 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 328 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 348 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 310 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 328 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 351 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 334 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 960 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 907 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 347 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 733 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 672 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 749 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 299 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 833 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 892 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 731 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 723 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 805 Views

Reply to Message