To me this entire discussion is folly, as are most topics discussed on
public. When Mhaldor revoked the law prohibiting extermination of
groves, they knew full well what Oakstone's reaction would be.
Therefore, it's useless for Mhaldor to assign to Oakstone some ulterior
motive, or to act outraged that Oakstone has stopped them from doing
exactly as they please.

Almost certainly, Mhaldor and Oakstone will remain at odds until the law
is re-instated. Either Mhaldor will or will not reinstate it's law. Any
further discussion is useless unless it comprises actual negotiation.

Another vein this discussion has gone in has been stereotypes. Does
Oakstone have any choice but to 'stereotype' the Mhaldorian government.
Any democratic government (and all governments are democratic in Achaea)
is the sum of it's parts. Therefore it's reasonable to assume that the
majority of the citizenry supports the decision to revoke the
extermination law. Does Oakstone have any choice but to act in a manner
in accordance with this?

In my opinion the government of Mhaldor acted without thought to the
general well-being of it's citizens by ending the treaty that Oakstone
and Mhaldor kept.

In doing this, Mhaldor proved it's corruptness. They acted to protect a
relatively small number of citizens who broke a law they already had in
existence.

That's all I have to say,
Elysian Azor Celeste, Magi Chronicler

Penned by my hand on the 21st of Sarapin, in the year 349 AF.