Active Users:3615 Time:25/03/2026 06:38:19 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 1203 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 317 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 289 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 302 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 276 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 288 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 312 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 287 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 858 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 824 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 305 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 642 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 584 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 642 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 261 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 791 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 639 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 627 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 707 Views

Reply to Message