Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is this appropiate?

DoctorDeku
Posts: 162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:19:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I've just finished my first debate on this site and I must say that. However after speaking with my opponent via PM, he informed me he has his friends vote on the debate. After review their RFDs I'm beyond upset that he had done this; is this common practice here? And if so how can I expect to be involved in any kind of debate or discussion not dictated by argumentative politics?

I had figured that would have been a benefit to debating online, but now I feel like it's all an exercise in futility.
MilitaryAtheist
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:25:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 1:19:49 PM, DoctorDeku wrote:
I've just finished my first debate on this site and I must say that. However after speaking with my opponent via PM, he informed me he has his friends vote on the debate. After review their RFDs I'm beyond upset that he had done this; is this common practice here? And if so how can I expect to be involved in any kind of debate or discussion not dictated by argumentative politics?

I had figured that would have been a benefit to debating online, but now I feel like it's all an exercise in futility.

Depends. If thier RFD it is okay. but if is unfair then it is a votebomb.
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:33:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Can't see he has too many friends voting on the debate. I'll note that Goreford's conduct point is wrong (two links are indeed broken) but that's just oversight. Maybe you'll get some more voters from posting this.
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:36:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 1:19:49 PM, DoctorDeku wrote:
I've just finished my first debate on this site and I must say that. However after speaking with my opponent via PM, he informed me he has his friends vote on the debate. After review their RFDs I'm beyond upset that he had done this; is this common practice here? And if so how can I expect to be involved in any kind of debate or discussion not dictated by argumentative politics?

This happens all the time.

I had figured that would have been a benefit to debating online, but now I feel like it's all an exercise in futility.

It usually takes members at least a few months to figure that out, but it seems you're ahead of the game.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:52:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well, I guess I should at least give an opposing viewpoint.

Here's the email I sent in its entirety:

Friends,

"I am emailing everyone on my friends list this same message.

Please, PLEASE FOR THE SAKE OF DECENCY review this debate and vote what you think.

I was originally neutral about the issue, but after researching it became 100% AGAINST THE RESOLUTION.

I hope you guys find it informative, and thanks. Feedback appreciated.

Cheers, and good luck on the rest of your debates.

http://debate.org...;

I did not ask anyone to vote bomb, I wanted eyes-on this debate, so I sent the message. I shouldn't have to disclose what I say in private, but I figured it would do this issue more good than harm. It's not my fault that doctordeku has no friends on this website, even though he has been on it 8 times longer than I have.

@iamnotwhoiam,

Personally I found your conduct point against me to be wholly off the mark. I do think that conduct was an issue in that my opponent was indeed arguing in bad faith in regards to attempting to unreasonably restrict the scope of my argument. My opponent stopped this mid-way which is why I didn't make a bigger issue out of it. Yet you dinged me for making this assertion for some unknown reason.

Personally I could care less, there is much more atrocious voting behavior on this website, but since we're nitpicking now, I figure I'd do so as well.

Also, one of my opponent's accusations were false, the 2nd link did indeed work, and I don't know why he called me out on it. The third link didn't work, I re-posted a link, problem solved, although my opponent continually sought to accuse me of broken links well after I took care of this problem. That's a possible conduct violation, depending on how you look at it.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
GorefordMaximillion
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:53:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 1:33:27 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
Can't see he has too many friends voting on the debate. I'll note that Goreford's conduct point is wrong (two links are indeed broken) but that's just oversight. Maybe you'll get some more voters from posting this.

I clicked the links and they worked. Honest.
I do not vote-bomb.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:55:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Lastly, I will post my last email to doctordeku:

"I didn't friend these people so that they could bring their feminazi views onto this one debate and make your life hell. I friended these people because I found them civil and intelligent. That's why I friended you as well."

I think doctordeku would benefit from increasing his friends list. Just some friendly advice. :)
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 1:59:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 1:19:49 PM, DoctorDeku wrote:
I've just finished my first debate on this site and I must say that. However after speaking with my opponent via PM, he informed me he has his friends vote on the debate. After review their RFDs I'm beyond upset that he had done this; is this common practice here? And if so how can I expect to be involved in any kind of debate or discussion not dictated by argumentative politics?

I had figured that would have been a benefit to debating online, but now I feel like it's all an exercise in futility.

Personally I'm also upset at how the voting went. I do believe I have a slam dunk case, even if it is somewhat unpopular. Am I going to go about crying over it and demand that people change their vote? Absolutely not, the voters are free to their opinion. It encourages discussion and that's the whole point of this exercise.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:02:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 1:52:01 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

@iamnotwhoiam,

Personally I found your conduct point against me to be wholly off the mark. I do think that conduct was an issue in that my opponent was indeed arguing in bad faith in regards to attempting to unreasonably restrict the scope of my argument.

Even if you think he is not debating in good faith, you lose the conduct point for stating it.

Also, one of my opponent's accusations were false, the 2nd link did indeed work, and I don't know why he called me out on it.

http://www.unodc.org...
and
http://www2.macleans.ca...

are both broken links.

my opponent continually sought to accuse me of broken links well after I took care of this problem.

No he did not. He just said he was justified in calling you out on it. Which he was.
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:04:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 1:53:39 PM, GorefordMaximillion wrote:
At 12/11/2012 1:33:27 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
Can't see he has too many friends voting on the debate. I'll note that Goreford's conduct point is wrong (two links are indeed broken) but that's just oversight. Maybe you'll get some more voters from posting this.

I clicked the links and they worked. Honest.
I do not vote-bomb.

No I know you do not vote bomb.

The links do go to in-site 404 pages, but that is all.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:26:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Like I said, the first link works, don't know why people keep insisting it doesn't. I even quoted out of it just in case someone's computer is messing up on them.

I fixed the other link the moment he made me aware of it. Next round, he accuses me again of it. I say it is a redundant accusation. He stops. Problem solved.

iamnotwhoiam, I still think your conduct vote against me was totally inappropriate.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:29:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 2:26:22 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Like I said, the first link works, don't know why people keep insisting it doesn't. I even quoted out of it just in case someone's computer is messing up on them.

Hmm. Okay. Maybe it's a geographical thing. One of their servers is online, another offline.

iamnotwhoiam, I still think your conduct vote against me was totally inappropriate.

Do you think it is good conduct to accuse others of arguing in bad faith?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:36:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 2:29:35 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:26:22 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Like I said, the first link works, don't know why people keep insisting it doesn't. I even quoted out of it just in case someone's computer is messing up on them.

Hmm. Okay. Maybe it's a geographical thing. One of their servers is online, another offline.


iamnotwhoiam, I still think your conduct vote against me was totally inappropriate.

Do you think it is good conduct to accuse others of arguing in bad faith?

If they are arguing in bad faith, then yes, I do think it is completely appropriate to point them out on it. I saw my opponent adding restrictions to what I was able to present during the debate. I called him out on it (twice), and I pointed out that he was arguing in bad faith. He stopped the behavior, so I stopped pointing it out.

He then "accuse[s] me of making "several attacks on [PRO's] character during this debate". I then respond:

"Untrue, I merely stated that "PRO is "fabricating inane rules and regulations," "unreasonably restrict[ing] the scope of [CON's] arguments," and is "no longer arguing in good faith," all of which I will reassert." As far as I am concerned, all of this was true.

Also note that he sought to restrict me from making any new arguments in the final round, even though he did himself on multiple occasions.

I have a strong case to demand conduct be taken from him, not the other way around.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:45:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 2:36:01 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

If they are arguing in bad faith, then yes, I do think it is completely appropriate to point them out on it.

To do that you would have to establish they were arguing in bad faith, which is not possible. You CAN show that their points are invalid, or that what they ask of you you do not have to do.

Also, since you are involved in the debate, it would be best to leave it to the voters as to what they think your opponent's intentions are. Good conduct is to engage with the arguments and to treat the opponent's intentions as charitably as possible. If you don't want to lose conduct points, don't accuse your opponent of arguing in bad faith. You gain nothing in doing so, anyhow, since an accusation does not present an argument.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:48:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Just to spell it out:

PRO states: "Con has established their burden on economic security; accordingly social or moral implications aren't voting issues."

PRO states: "Despite arguing on an economic framework, my opponent makes several moral arguments; gender inequality, unfaithful Korean men and human trafficking (which I cover in my Status Quo argument) are just a few.
Conclusion: My opponent's arguments do not conform to the scope of this debate in terms of the U.S., Negative rights or the Economy."

I saw these points as seeking to limit what I was able to proffer as valid arguments. Of course I can argue based on morality. There were no restrictions made evident in round #1. I had to address this directly multiple times. He sought to limit my argument solely to economics, and to dismiss as "nonconforming" any moral arguments I brought to the table. This is why I called him out on it, and why I thought he was no longer arguing in good faith.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:50:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I would like to see a flame war between the two debaters, if possible.

If one of you starts insulting the other, I'll give you seven points in the debate ;)
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:52:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 2:45:04 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:36:01 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

If they are arguing in bad faith, then yes, I do think it is completely appropriate to point them out on it.

To do that you would have to establish they were arguing in bad faith, which is not possible. You CAN show that their points are invalid, or that what they ask of you you do not have to do.

Also, since you are involved in the debate, it would be best to leave it to the voters as to what they think your opponent's intentions are. Good conduct is to engage with the arguments and to treat the opponent's intentions as charitably as possible. If you don't want to lose conduct points, don't accuse your opponent of arguing in bad faith. You gain nothing in doing so, anyhow, since an accusation does not present an argument.

I wholly disagree with you here. I demonstrated multiple times where my opponent was seeking to unfairly limit the scope of what I was able to present. That's arguing in bad faith. Once I called him out on it, he stopped. He then move onto "character attacks", another wholly unfounded accusation.

It was a messy debate. He tried to play the victim card, all the while seeking to unjustly limit what I was able to do. Personally I found it to be quite an underhanded technique.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:56:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
iamnotwhoiam,

I will even go so far as to state that your entire premise for voting on doctordeku's side is invalid.

Your justification was that what laws passed in Canada are working, EVEN THOUGH I had pointed out that these laws were passed less than a year ago.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 2:57:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 2:52:28 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:45:04 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:36:01 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

If they are arguing in bad faith, then yes, I do think it is completely appropriate to point them out on it.

To do that you would have to establish they were arguing in bad faith, which is not possible. You CAN show that their points are invalid, or that what they ask of you you do not have to do.

Also, since you are involved in the debate, it would be best to leave it to the voters as to what they think your opponent's intentions are. Good conduct is to engage with the arguments and to treat the opponent's intentions as charitably as possible. If you don't want to lose conduct points, don't accuse your opponent of arguing in bad faith. You gain nothing in doing so, anyhow, since an accusation does not present an argument.

I wholly disagree with you here.

You can disagree, but you'll lose a conduct point from me when you do it in the future.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 3:04:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 2:57:39 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:52:28 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:45:04 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/11/2012 2:36:01 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

If they are arguing in bad faith, then yes, I do think it is completely appropriate to point them out on it.

To do that you would have to establish they were arguing in bad faith, which is not possible. You CAN show that their points are invalid, or that what they ask of you you do not have to do.

Also, since you are involved in the debate, it would be best to leave it to the voters as to what they think your opponent's intentions are. Good conduct is to engage with the arguments and to treat the opponent's intentions as charitably as possible. If you don't want to lose conduct points, don't accuse your opponent of arguing in bad faith. You gain nothing in doing so, anyhow, since an accusation does not present an argument.

I wholly disagree with you here.

You can disagree, but you'll lose a conduct point from me when you do it in the future.

I do not understand how it is inappropriate to call out someone who is arguing in bad faith, after such intentions have already been demonstrated.

I will now call you out on improper voting procedures and (unintentionally) vote-bombing.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 3:07:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 3:04:16 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

I do not understand how it is inappropriate to call out someone who is arguing in bad faith, after such intentions have already been demonstrated.

You can't demonstrate intentions.

I will now call you out on improper voting procedures and (unintentionally) vote-bombing.

You don't know what vote bombing means.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 3:36:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
It's okay to ask people to vote on your debate. It's absolutely not okay to ask for people to vote for you on a debate. It's also not okay to vote for someone solely because you're friends with him or because he asked you to vote on his debate.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 4:01:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If you think unfair voting practices have occurred in one of your debates, you can post it here to get it more publicity:

http://www.debate.org...
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 4:03:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
But I don't see any problem with the votes, to be honest. I haven't read the debate though.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
DoctorDeku
Posts: 162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 6:14:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm not saying that I think the votes were unjustified, though I do believe that GM's conduct voter is unjustified - My intention of this post we to inquire on 'friends' voting for each other. It seems very underhanded to me and outside of the standard of conduct that my opponent is claiming to be so important.

If you ask a friend to vote on something they're naturally going to want to side with their friends; the aforementioned links don't work for me and I made that clear, in my post and Wrichcirw called abuse; neither questioning evidence nor calling out broken sources is abusive.

I would never question a judge's decision, or argue with an RFD; it's the issue of getting friends to vote that bothers me.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 7:13:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 6:14:30 PM, DoctorDeku wrote:
I'm not saying that I think the votes were unjustified, though I do believe that GM's conduct voter is unjustified - My intention of this post we to inquire on 'friends' voting for each other. It seems very underhanded to me and outside of the standard of conduct that my opponent is claiming to be so important.

If you ask a friend to vote on something they're naturally going to want to side with their friends; the aforementioned links don't work for me and I made that clear, in my post and Wrichcirw called abuse; neither questioning evidence nor calling out broken sources is abusive.

I would never question a judge's decision, or argue with an RFD; it's the issue of getting friends to vote that bothers me.

I can understand how this can be an issue for you, since you have no friends on this website. :/

Again, getting eyes on a debate is actually a good thing. Vote-bombing is a bad thing. One_Winged_Rook is also on my friends list, even though he has not voted for me once - to include this debate.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2012 7:31:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 3:07:49 PM, iamnotwhoiam wrote:
At 12/11/2012 3:04:16 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

I do not understand how it is inappropriate to call out someone who is arguing in bad faith, after such intentions have already been demonstrated.

You can't demonstrate intentions.

I will now call you out on improper voting procedures and (unintentionally) vote-bombing.

You don't know what vote bombing means.

Yes you can demonstrate intentions. Have you heard of the phrase "pre-meditated"? Guess what, INTENT is what determines whether or not a crime was pre-meditated, and DEMONSTRATING INTENT is how such a ruling is passed.

You don't know how to vote.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
iamnotwhoiam
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2012 5:26:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 7:31:26 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

Yes you can demonstrate intentions. Have you heard of the phrase "pre-meditated"? Guess what, INTENT is what determines whether or not a crime was pre-meditated, and DEMONSTRATING INTENT is how such a ruling is passed.


You are telling me intention to perform an act can be assessed in a court of law. I am telling you that you can't, in a debate, conclusively demonstrate whether the intention of your opponent is honest or dishonest. As a party to the debate, you must assume charity. I did not say that the voters could not assess the intentions of the debaters. In fact, I told you to leave it to them.

You don't know how to vote.

You are arrogant and your attitude won't get you the results you seek.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2012 5:30:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 6:14:30 PM, DoctorDeku wrote:
I'm not saying that I think the votes were unjustified, though I do believe that GM's conduct voter is unjustified - My intention of this post we to inquire on 'friends' voting for each other. It seems very underhanded to me and outside of the standard of conduct that my opponent is claiming to be so important.

If you ask a friend to vote on something they're naturally going to want to side with their friends; the aforementioned links don't work for me and I made that clear, in my post and Wrichcirw called abuse; neither questioning evidence nor calling out broken sources is abusive.

I would never question a judge's decision, or argue with an RFD; it's the issue of getting friends to vote that bothers me.

Well, it depends what you mean by friend. On DDO, pretty much everyone adds each other as a friend. And we become very attached with each other, despite our differences.

But if we're talking about asking a ton of people with the same views that you have to vote on a debate concerning those views, that's bad conduct and they will get called out for it.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2012 7:23:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/11/2012 6:14:30 PM, DoctorDeku wrote:
I'm not saying that I think the votes were unjustified, though I do believe that GM's conduct voter is unjustified - My intention of this post we to inquire on 'friends' voting for each other. It seems very underhanded to me and outside of the standard of conduct that my opponent is claiming to be so important.

If you ask a friend to vote on something they're naturally going to want to side with their friends; the aforementioned links don't work for me and I made that clear, in my post and Wrichcirw called abuse; neither questioning evidence nor calling out broken sources is abusive.

I would never question a judge's decision, or argue with an RFD; it's the issue of getting friends to vote that bothers me.

You are assuming that these friends have no intellectual integrity, which flies in the face of the purpose of this site.
Does it happen? Sure, but I think if one is going to be intellectually dishonest, it is more likely that people will vote on their opinion on the issue than side with their "friend".
My work here is, finally, done.