Let me begin by expressing that I am glad to hear that your peers have
counselled you not to respond. It is saddening to see how little value
you seem to place in your friends' worthy wisdom. Well advised indeed
would you have been to "shut your hole" as they say these days, lest
your ramblings bespeaks your inanity. Alas, we will have to contend
ourselves with the hope that in days to come you will have learned for
the better.

Now, I must apologize in advance - I will have to fail at addressing all
your points, intriguing as they may be. I am sure there are those with
enough patience to spell out each of your fallacies for you to learn.
It was most interesting to see you berate Aiakon for his perceived
failure to answer your points in "satisfactory" manner. Yet, your own
post ends with an admission to your own failure to invest the time
needed to compose a satisfactory coherent post - forgive me, but I fail
to see your logic here.
Likewise, please elaborate on your definition of "bias", Raizan. Surely
if you accuse Aiakon of bias, you would be sure to avoid this
shortcoming yourself? So what is this talk of "being tainted, and
choosing to remain tainted being a crime in and of itself"? Surely you
will agree that this hardly qualifies as an objective, unbiased
statement, as it is clearly written from a perspective blurred by
subjective dogma. The same rings true for your implication that the
melodies of Celestia must be preferred to that of Celestia - that on its
own demonstrates bias.

Regarding this "blacklist" you claim the Nihilists to possess: Former
Nihilists have confirmed its existence? I have to wonder, by which
standards are we to consider the words of traitors valid evidence, or
information given by former members of an organisation valid proof for
the existence of such a list "at the moment of your post"? You go on to
claim that your dreamweaving has produced evidence of its existence.
Where is this evidence, Raizan? Are you referring to a scroll you
believe to have read when forcefully invading a Nihilist's mind, or a
document you claim to have seen when breaking into their premises,
maybe? I am sure you would like us to take your word on it, and best
ignore the illegal methods employed to acquire your alleged "proof" as
well. Next time you try to back your accusations with fact, you should
at least make sure it is not as shady and dubious as this rubbish. Nice
try, though.

Finally, while I am amused to see you accuse Aiakon of contradicting
himself even in differing viewpoints, I must question your own judgement
in this matter. For one, rest assured that "differing viewpoints" in the
context you use them are but a convenient excuse for the refusal to
admit that your opponent is right, and you are wrong. Also, you seem to
have poor grasp of the concept of what is or is not a "disgrace" to
something. I will not go into details, but let me simply say that Aiakon
can hardly be a disgrace to your guild, considering that he, as you
point out, is not part of it, and thus not to be judged by its
standards. You, on the other hand, are a different case entirely.

No, Raizan, you will have to do better than that if you want us to agree
on your stance. For now you stand as a shady hypocrite of little
capacity for objectivity or solid judgement, lacking even in sincere
effort to argue your points well. Sarcastic as your finishing claim to
"mental deficiencies" may have been in intent, I'm afraid it gives a
fitting explanation of your writings. Please, Raizan, do follow the
advice of your friends next time.

- Lomdomian

Penned by my hand on the 19th of Dvarsh, in the year 145 CE.