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
1204 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM*
- 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM
302 Views
That's not how speculation works.
- 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM
824 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
259 Views
Settle down there, tom. Not everyone shares your obviously superior intellect.
- 20/11/2009 03:05:44 AM
699 Views
Yes. It is.
- 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM
643 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason.
- 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM
584 Views
Let me guess
- 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM
744 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but...
- 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM
792 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test
- 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM
628 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
267 Views

. *NM*