People come up with a lot of theories in the comments for Errant. Sometimes they guess correctly, sometimes they guess incorrectly, quite often they guess a mixture, like one detail will be right on the nose, but the rest will be off.
Most often my readers ask me IF certain things will happen. I like this approach much better because I can say stuff like "That's a really good question...that I'm going to avoid answering!" Like this one from @AbelDraws
Abel is actually very canny at noticing clues and setup I've dropped, probably one of my most perceptive readers and we share similar influences and tone to our work, so a lot of her theories are very solid, so I can't really confirm or deny them a lot of the time! All of this theorising is based on stuff that's already there: We know Sarin's going to be angry because of what's happened, we know Rekki has a hot temper and is protective of her, we know Urien is incredibly manipulative and we can infer that Sylvia is probably on her way (because why else would I set up a character and have her last seen getting up in a hurry?) so there's nothing to be petty about here and rewrite it so that Arya Stark comes out of the left field to stab Urien to death just to be surprising (YES, I am still salty about the GoT finale!) this is an engaged reader paying attention.
Comments inevitably come down to the "infinite monkeys typing out shakespeare" concept; if you have enough people theorising, by sheer probability, somebody will correctly guess the plot either by random guess or by the probability of getting readers with similar storytelling sensibility to yourself or by carefully combing for clues and patterns. So the coolest response is just to be like "Ooh, cool theory, wait and see!" and not to be sour if somebody calls it. I'm not here to try to outsmart my readers to feel superior to them; I'm here to tell them a fun story, and sometimes that means surprising them, or sometimes it means rewarding them for noticing my clues or understanding the characters. It's all good!