Active Users:929 Time:23/11/2024 10:48:25 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 993 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:36:16 PM 231 Views
No. *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:38:19 PM 210 Views
Sure why the hell not... *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:56:12 PM 215 Views
I like the way you think *NM* - 20/11/2009 12:17:01 AM 195 Views
Thank you *NM* - 26/11/2009 08:41:04 PM 209 Views
Meh. Yeah, why not? *NM* - 20/11/2009 04:17:46 PM 235 Views
because it's not true *NM* - 19/11/2009 10:59:38 PM 209 Views
Re: Mesaana == Silviana ... - 19/11/2009 11:07:56 PM 674 Views
That's not how speculation works. - 19/11/2009 11:41:55 PM 626 Views
Well, it's how speculation works. Plus, it has charisma! *NM* - 20/11/2009 01:18:48 AM 218 Views
Yes. It is. - 20/11/2009 03:06:04 AM 441 Views
Because I declared it to be so. That is sufficient reason. - 20/11/2009 03:33:54 AM 397 Views
This severely limits any discussion. - 20/11/2009 09:36:17 PM 433 Views
My point exactly . *NM* - 20/11/2009 10:12:06 PM 184 Views
Let me guess - 20/11/2009 12:07:46 AM 553 Views
Yes, the original post was dumb, but... - 20/11/2009 08:09:27 AM 600 Views
Perhaps - 20/11/2009 11:18:56 AM 451 Views
Fails the Sanderson confusion test - 20/11/2009 01:07:43 PM 436 Views
Oh, I see your reasoning. - 20/11/2009 03:14:11 AM 513 Views

Reply to Message