Active Users:741 Time:13/05/2026 07:57:58 PM
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 1228 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 329 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 297 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 318 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 284 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 299 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 322 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 298 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 893 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 846 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 317 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 673 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 611 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 670 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 273 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 767 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 815 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 665 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 660 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 742 Views

Reply to Message