Active Users:874 Time:07/11/2025 04:40:14 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 1124 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 286 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 264 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 274 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 250 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 264 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 286 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 263 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 797 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 751 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 274 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 580 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 527 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 564 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 239 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 682 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 726 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 576 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 559 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 643 Views

Reply to Message