Theres alot more clans that are older than mines okay trust me though i dont expect u to. Jest becasue you had not heard of us does not mean we dont exsits, we perfer to keep to the shadows but at the same time in the light we keep ourselves balenced "Too much dark or light, good or evil will be the undoing or all." Plus and final: most of our wisdom is restricted because we have rivals that would kill to have our secrets.
There's no evidence for anything which you said. While it's true that me not having previously heard of your clan would not mean it cannot exist, it would be incredibly foolish and negligent to believe something so wild and so completely unsubstantiated.
Besides, as an actual member of an actual order which keeps actual secrets I can tell you that your way you treat your so-called secrets (namely, "we have rivals that would kill to have our secrets" and "but i can say this our wisdom comes from one of the Five fragments of Gogon") is not at all appropriate or believable for an actual oath-bound magician. It would be irresponsible, dangerous, and makes it even harder to believe that you're part of a centuries old secret.
My point is that while this story might fool the average person, lying about magick to magicians is a pretty poor idea.
And seriously, if you really truly had "rivals that would kill to have [your] secrets" you wouldn't be talking about them on an extremely popular public forum, and you sure as heck wouldn't have your age and city of residence in your profile. And again, if this group made a habit of initiating 16 year old youths this eager to dance as close to revealing their secrets as possible, they wouldn't have remained secret for a month, to say nothing for centuries.
I'm not trying to be mean, but I can't really think of a nice way to say "literally nothing you've said makes sense, sounds plausible, or has proof."
When i said secrets i in no where in my sentece mentioned the acuall name of the secrets when one does not say the objects true name its still a secret for its ture nature is unknown sorry if i sound like from high school bookworm. you can blab about what the object is and not say the real name and it still will be a secret.
Your right i agree with you but some things need proof and at the same time there are things that dont need nor even have proof. Somtimes people need to take a leap of faith regardless how much nonescese it emits. yes i known its from Assassin's Creed but in many ways its semily true.
"When i said secrets i in no where in my sentece mentioned the acuall name of the secrets when one does not say the objects true name its still a secret for its ture nature is unknown sorry if i sound like from high school bookworm. you can blab about what the object is and not say the real name and it still will be a secret."
Not necessarily true. If I hint at my name in enough ways, enough times, you'll eventually figure out that my name is Miles even if I never come flat out and say "My name is Miles." If I were attempting to keep my name secret and you, by merit of the things I say, figure it out, I have failed at keeping that secret. That I didn't directly and immediately spoon-feed it to you in the form of "My name is Miles" in no way detracts from that.
I am again not trying to be mean, but you seriously do not appear to understand what it means to be oathbound.
"Your right i agree with you but some things need proof and at the same time there are things that dont need nor even have proof."
I suppose "evidence" would be a more accurate term than "proof" in this case, but I'd still like to know where in the world you got this idea from. You may also wish to take a few minutes to google "burden of proof."
"Somtimes people need to take a leap of faith regardless how much nonescese it emits."
Just to be absolutely clear, a "leap of faith" is defined as being an act or instance of accepting or trusting in something that cannot readily be seen or proved. A leap of faith is therefore incompatible with being rational and sounds like a terrible thing to combine with science.
"yes i known its from Assassin's Creed but in many ways its semily true."
Hey classy. Maybe you should get your information from, like, a book or something?
I have one issue with this whole thing that I read beyond what Chiron said. You claim to be holding an oath that prevents you from speaking about your coven directly or about the magic that they do...yet the coven's name includes "warlock". The meaning of the term warlock is that one is an oath-breaker, a breaker of the coven's sanctity and secrecy. An oath-breaker is not one to take oaths seriously.
Your coven's very name breaks part of the way it runs.
Look at the illuminati for example depending on what u think if they exsits or not people think they do but really dont there is not enough evidnce to proov they exsits. We have the same deal we are open now and then but people dont think we really exsist becuase as u said i dont have proof what i getting at here is the way we operate is blareing out ourselves now and then in works as to cause confusion with that nothing can really be done to proov its one of the perfect covers, You following any of what im trying to say.
