Yet, since Graendal is obviously dead now and nothing suggests that she will ever have a PoV again - while Slayer definitely will be in ToM & possibly AMoL (likely with a PoV) - BS will certainly get the opportunity to reveal the mystery concerning Asmo's death in Slayer's PoV, as RJ said the revelation would probably happen in the killer's PoV.
how this is not an important argument or one that carries much weight among the people who believe Graendal did it; they just assume that RJ's "probably" didn't turn out that way, what with Sanderson taking over.
So you can repeat this as often as you like, but I don't think there's much of a point to it unless you're preaching to the choir of those who share your conviction about Slayer...
Another blow to the Graendaldunnit-theory
- 14/11/2009 10:41:32 AM
1565 Views
I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that.
- 14/11/2009 02:53:25 PM
997 Views
He has stated that they will put the mystery to rest in the final books...
- 14/11/2009 04:02:53 PM
1138 Views
I actually figured a way that this could come up quite naturally without Graendal
- 14/11/2009 04:11:24 PM
1089 Views
RJ said it will probably revealed in the killer's PoV
- 14/11/2009 04:46:20 PM
941 Views
And Brandon said Harriet gave him the freedom to tell the story as he wishes.
- 14/11/2009 06:05:40 PM
884 Views
We (you, me & RJ) agree that it would be best to reveal it in the killer's PoV
- 14/11/2009 06:40:33 PM
934 Views
Wait...wait...this is funny.
- 20/11/2009 02:05:26 AM
801 Views
I often explained it, because many don't seem to get it
- 20/11/2009 12:17:21 PM
787 Views
So maybe Graendal didn't care enough about Asmodean, either.
- 20/11/2009 02:07:02 PM
830 Views
Neither Graendal nor Slayer mention killing Asmo...
- 20/11/2009 02:46:40 PM
979 Views
I'm sure you can see...
- 20/11/2009 03:25:41 PM
976 Views
It seems you think I don't read any posts and you certainly haven't read this board much.
- 14/11/2009 04:30:06 PM
892 Views
That's wrong
- 14/11/2009 04:45:02 PM
1022 Views
Not one word of what I wrote is wrong.
- 15/11/2009 01:41:18 AM
940 Views
right here
- 15/11/2009 03:04:57 AM
857 Views
If Graendal's name is mentioned, then "Graendal" is in the book. *NM*
- 15/11/2009 12:13:57 PM
408 Views
BS just said that Graendal will be mentioned, not appear as a character in ToM. *NM*
- 15/11/2009 09:58:53 AM
386 Views
I never said "appear as a character." *NM*
- 15/11/2009 12:14:16 PM
377 Views
- 15/11/2009 12:44:07 PM
954 Views
- 15/11/2009 12:44:07 PM
954 Views
BS never would have figured it out himself that Graendal did it? *NM*
- 14/11/2009 05:20:19 PM
374 Views
Re: I don't see any reason the Graendal theory is wrong from that.
- 19/11/2009 12:07:25 AM
1103 Views
I don't agree with this interpretation at all - your grasping for straws...
- 14/11/2009 07:34:58 PM
908 Views
Only if you make the assumption that she was the most obvious to Sanderson.
- 14/11/2009 07:37:39 PM
963 Views
No. Try again.
- 14/11/2009 11:35:59 PM
976 Views
Ok, I will stay alert for further blows to Graendaldunnit, if this didn't already convince you! 
*NM*
- 15/11/2009 10:02:26 AM
359 Views
*NM*
- 15/11/2009 10:02:26 AM
359 Views
Actually this is more against the Slayer theory
- 15/11/2009 01:49:08 PM
884 Views
Nonsense...
- 15/11/2009 02:06:04 PM
852 Views
Your tenacity is impressive. 
- 15/11/2009 03:14:50 PM
897 Views
- 15/11/2009 03:14:50 PM
897 Views
Absolut statements in such discussions...
- 15/11/2009 03:53:22 PM
818 Views
Re: Absolut statements in such discussions...
- 15/11/2009 05:57:25 PM
777 Views