When the gods had realized their errors in the creation of the first dwellers of Earth, they also realized that these creations of theirs could not be altered. Never having anticipated the possibility of failure or imperfection, the banes were created without any fail-safe means of taking the gift of existence back from them. The most logical decision of the time was that if the life forms could not be destroyed, they would be shoved out of the way where no god would have to deal with or be reminded of them.
As there had always been, and as there always will be, there was disagreement among the gods over this event. Some gods wanted to place the banes in an eternal existence of bliss in apology; others wanted to throw them into molten rock and let them deal with it. How DARE they be imperfect and make the gods look bad? To avoid conflict among the gods, the Assembly of Seven fashioned the prison to be a facsimile of Earth. It would contain the necessities and beauties of Earth, but would contain the same pain, death, and misery. In this way, no one would have to deal with them and all could be satisfied.
All but the wild, uncontrollable creations themselves, but what say did they have in this proceeding anyway? What say would they ever have? The fate of the banes was well beyond their own control.
the events were quite similar for the trial of the Recent, but unlike the banes, the two Recents had been created with the possibility of the removal of their immortality should it ever become necessary. This was not to say that the gods ever anticipated a problem, but they did not want to make themselves look any more foolish by making the same mistake twice.
Again it appeared possible that a debate over an immense godly issue could tear the society of gods to pieces. Should the Recent be destroyed, or scolded? Was his crime really so severe? Is it fair that he could be eternally done away with for an action which would be only considered rude for one of a slightly higher rank in god hierarchy? What would be the magnitude of his punishment? What right did they have to condone him; had they not all erred themselves before? A solution would have to be determined which would satisfy the many gods who were in severe disagreement, for when the issue concerns the possibility of the gods making an error, all becomes disordered and dangerous.
The decision to seal the vagrant Recent within the World of Affliction was made for many of the same reasons the place was conceived in the beginning. He would be out of sight, out of mind. He would be punished, but have the same claim to existence as the first creations of life. Moreover, this solution would hopefully relax the tension which had built up concerning the issue.
It did not.
The gods who supported a harsh punishment were convinced that a mortal would not survive a month among the savage entities of the World of Affliction. Those who had defended the Recent were appalled. As conditions worsened, the Assembly of Seven realized that in order to avoid an uprising more severe than the one which had put them into power eons ago, further concessions would have to be made.
Policy for the Recent's future release was begun. Perhaps, given enough time procrastinating the issue, it would be forgotten, or perhaps after the policy was enacted, the Recent would be discovered to be dead or unfit for return to the society of gods. At the very least, he could be born onto human Earth instead and live a less harsh life there, or at least an existence which the sympathists could monitor for their own appeasement.
Certain gods would not let the issue go untouched and made it their duty to ensure that the Recent was restored to his full godly glory. They were bound to this cause by fear for their own safety. After all, if this could be done to a Recent, who's to prevent such an event from happening to one of the original gods?
One god took more interest than the others in this matter, and had very good reason, and it was this god who put forward all effort to see it through.