Active Users:3694 Time:28/06/2026 03:07:39 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 1241 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 338 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 306 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 324 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 291 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 304 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 328 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 305 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 908 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 860 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 322 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 688 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 626 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 687 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 281 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 786 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 834 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 680 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 674 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 755 Views

Reply to Message