Zodiark's Codex entry what do we think about it?

[Lunaxia]

...

But the point was that he does or could lie, purely on the basis that he has the motive to do so, which is then used as justification to disregard everything he told us as unreliable despite it being evident that he was telling the truth about pretty much everything all along. So rehashing the same argument to use that against him and anything he might have told us just doesn't work.

Pulling at straws by listing the times he didn't delve into the absolute details of what we spoke to him about to highlight how untrustworthy he is doesn't seem fair either, not only because it's a little unrealistic to expect unremittent exposition from both a character and story point of view, but you forget that he openly invited us to question him, and expressed frustration when we took no interest in him. You accuse him of withholding information, but we also didn't ask.

• The actual nature of Ancient life and society; that whole 'they weren't perfect no-problems angels' thing. I don't know anyone who talks about loved ones they're grieving for (who were summarily wiped from existence) only to add an addendum of "I guess they could kind of be assholes once in a while too."
• The fact Zodiark was sacrificed to more than once. (We learned that form Fake Hythlodaeus, who's sort of a rogue agent) Highly subjective, given that Phantom Hyth was Emet-Selch's creation. It's not exactly relevant, either: a lot of Ancients died to save the world, that's more or less the jist of it.
• The nature of said sacrifices RE: how voluntary they were and all that. The original topic of debate, which I believe the ShB narrative does treat as being voluntary. Hold onto your perception if you like; I don't agree with it.
• Any mention of any dissent to the Zodiark plan beyond 'and suddenly Hydaelyn happened'. (His description of what Hydaelyn was angling for doesn't seem quite right either, but I'll chalk that up to him not actually knowing.) Not only does Phantom Hyth expand on this, but Emet-Selch also goes into a little more detail on it in his side dialogue when you question him outside of the ShB quests.
• ...in fact, anything at all about the period between Zodiark and Hydaelyn's summonings. See above.
• Just any information whatsoever about how they landed on the Rejoinings as a strategy. Logic would dictate the world would need to be whole again to return it to their desired image. But we also didn't ask.
• The Thirteenth, and how they plan to do that. He did talk about the Thirteenth, and openly admitted they messed up there. Presumably it wasn't of too much consequence, or they probably wouldn't still be trying to rejoin the worlds?
• How many sacrifices to Zodiark will be made over the course of/following the Rejoining plan. He told us that in Amaurot: the remaining inhabitants of the Source following the calamities were to be offered as sacrifices.
• The part where we don't get to survive any of those Rejoinings. He mentioned this in Kholusia: that should we manage to survive, we would be "their equal."
• The part where they made primals actively temper, which... y'know, colors things, but I admit isn't as close to the subjects he talks about as the rest. I don't really see how that's relevant. It seems obvious to me that Zodiark's ability to temper was an accident, personally.

I don't know, it's like you are bending over backwards to refute anything he has to say in order to make the Ancients look worse than they actually are, and to what end, I can't fathom, unless it's to attempt to somehow justify the fate meted out to them. And I would really hope not, because such a line of thinking puts you squarely in the same box you're criticising the Ascians for.