Active Users:396 Time:12/08/2026 06:27:50 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 1260 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 350 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 316 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 333 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 298 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 317 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 341 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 320 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 934 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 881 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 333 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 707 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 647 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 709 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 292 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 806 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 856 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 705 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 693 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 776 Views

Reply to Message