Active Users:2942 Time:28/06/2026 04:28:30 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 1242 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 339 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 307 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 325 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 292 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 305 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 329 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 306 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 909 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 861 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 323 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 689 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 627 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 688 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 282 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 787 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 835 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 681 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 675 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 756 Views

Reply to Message