Active Users:1670 Time:26/09/2026 11:33:24 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 1289 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 362 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 329 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 349 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 311 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 329 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 352 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 335 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 961 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 908 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 348 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 734 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 673 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 750 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 300 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 834 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 893 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 732 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 725 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 806 Views

Reply to Message