I don't get your point about it being invalid?
If one says, take 30% of what I owe you or get lost, they are trying to steal only 70% of that amount? This is semantics and changes nothing about the matter. The order of magnitude being the same.
I guess you noticed 271 + 102 = 373 mBTC, so we are all talking about the same thing here. I don't think after reading the story that there would be any misunderstanding about that.
I think the amount should be stated correctly. The dispute is about 271 mBTC.
There is also the inability of the alleged victim to produce a
written contract supporting their statements, so using type 3 for this flag is also likely incorrect. I asked that question a few times and all I got back was some hypothetical doomsday scenario. A written contract flag should be bulletproof.