Theory: Danlan is more than she appears

[Curious Anamaximder he/him]

I'm going to propose that Danlan is actually Chaos, who has tracked Hoid to the Plains but doesn't know who he is from there.

I don't think so. I think Danlan is Taravangian's Alethi sleeper agent. Plus she knows Mraize and has access to 2 full Shardbearers.

[natc]

Can we stop Returning threads this month storm it XD.

[hoser he/him]

I don't think so. I think Danlan is Taravangian's Alethi sleeper agent. Plus she knows Mraize and has access to 2 full Shardbearers.

It's possible. She is known to be a part of Graves cell, which fits the suggestion of the OP.  She is basically known to be a spy for Mr. T.  Are you suggesting that she is secretly spying on Graves as an independent check by Mr. T?  How do you know that she knows Mraize? 

 

Can we stop Returning threads this month storm it XD.

Actually, in my annoyance at the repetitive posting of images about thread necromancy, I looked up forum etiquette.  As this is a Theory thread in a Book forum, I believe the following policy (from here) applies.  I guess there is a judgement call about how substantial the post is. Thread necroing is apparently acceptable in certain cases, explicitly so in theory threads in book forums.  

 

On that same note, don't bring back topics that have been dead forever. This is called thread necromancy (or simply "necroing"). If after a long time you post something new in a topic--one whose discussion has long since ended--that would be thread necroing. We're going to be more lenient about this on the Brandon Sanderson forums, because if you have something to add in the "Mistborn Movie Casting" topic and there hasn't been a post there in a great while, why shouldn't you? You're adding something to the discussion, that's fantastic! A lot of the Books forums will have theory threads, and if you have something to add to them which just perfectly fits the topic, better to revive a dead thread, right?

Thread necroing is only bad in a case like this: let's say Mi'chelle and Josh post in General Discussion saying "We're married!" in a few months. Members will congratulate them, but what you don't want to do is post three months later a congratulation. The sentiment's nice, but at the same time, the news is outdated. Your post is itself outdated, which means it didn't really need to be said. It was superfluous and there was no need for you to post it. Does that make sense? That's why most forums hate thread necromancy, because it's superfluous posting. Essentially, spamming.